A common dispute arises after siblings inherit a house together: one sibling pays the mortgage, property taxes, or other carrying costs, while the other contributes little or nothing. Eventually, the siblings decide to sell—or one of them brings a partition action to force a sale.
The sibling who paid the bills often asks a simple question: Do I get my money back before the remaining proceeds are divided?
In New York, the answer is potentially, but not automatically. In a partition action, the court may conduct an accounting and adjust the parties' shares based on expenses paid for the jointly owned property.
A 50/50 Ownership Interest Does Not Always Mean a 50/50 Check
When siblings inherit property in equal shares, their ownership percentages provide the starting point for dividing the property or its proceeds.
But that does not necessarily determine the final amount each sibling receives.
Partition actions are equitable proceedings, and an accounting may be necessary to determine the parties' respective rights to the proceeds.
For example, in Khotylev v. Spektor, 165 A.D.3d 1088 (2d Dep't 2018), the Appellate Division recognized the need for an accounting where a co-owner sought reimbursement for mortgage payments and other property expenses.
As a result, the court may consider not only who owns what percentage of the property, but also who actually paid expenses associated with carrying and preserving it.
Can a Sibling Receive Credit for Mortgage Payments?
Potentially, yes.
A co-owner who paid more than his or her share of the mortgage may seek a credit during the accounting.
In Degliuomini v. Degliuomini, 45 A.D.3d 626 (2d Dep't 2007), the court upheld reimbursement for one-half of mortgage payments and real estate taxes paid by one co-owner on behalf of jointly owned property.
That does not mean every mortgage payment automatically results in reimbursement.
The sibling seeking the credit must establish the payments and demonstrate an entitlement to the requested adjustment.
For example, in Kiernan v. Martin, 48 A.D.3d 641 (2d Dep't 2008), the court declined to award certain requested credits where the evidence was insufficient to establish the claimed entitlement.
The practical lesson is simple: documentation matters.
What About Property Taxes?
Property taxes can also become part of the accounting.
If one sibling has been paying taxes on jointly owned property while another has contributed nothing, those payments may be considered when the court determines the parties' respective shares of the proceeds.
The same basic principle applies: the person seeking reimbursement should be prepared to establish what was paid, when it was paid, and where the money came from.
Do Repairs and Renovations Count?
Repairs and improvements can be more complicated.
Necessary expenses incurred to preserve the property may be treated differently from optional renovations undertaken by one owner.
In Degliuomini, for example, the court declined to award certain claimed repair expenses because the party seeking reimbursement had not established that the work was necessary to protect or preserve the property.
Likewise, spending $50,000 renovating a jointly owned house does not necessarily mean the co-owner will receive a $50,000 credit when the property is sold.
The nature of the work, the circumstances surrounding it, and the evidence supporting the expenditure may all matter.
An Agreement Between the Siblings Can Change the Analysis
The parties' own agreements can also affect the accounting.
Siblings sometimes agree that one person will pay the mortgage while another handles different expenses. One sibling may agree to carry the property because that sibling is living there. In other situations, payments may have been made voluntarily without any expectation of repayment.
In Turrisi v. Severino, 77 A.D.3d 914 (2d Dep't 2010), the court considered agreements between the co-owners concerning their financial responsibilities and declined to award certain additional credits.
That is why emails, text messages, written agreements, and other communications concerning property expenses can become important evidence in a partition case.
What Records Should You Keep?
A co-owner paying more than his or her share of an inherited property's expenses should maintain a clear paper trail.
Useful records may include:
- Mortgage statements and proof of payment
- Real estate tax bills
- Homeowners' insurance records
- Contractor invoices and receipts
- Bank statements showing payments
- Communications with other co-owners about expenses
- Records concerning rent received from the property
Years may pass between the first payment and a later partition action. Reconstructing those expenses after the fact can be difficult.
Keeping good records from the beginning can make a substantial difference.
Why the Accounting Matters
Suppose two siblings each own 50% of an inherited house.
One sibling has paid the mortgage and taxes for several years while the other has paid nothing. If the house is eventually sold, simply dividing the net proceeds 50/50 may not resolve the parties' financial rights.
The sibling who made those payments may seek credits during the partition accounting. Whether those credits are ultimately awarded will depend on the particular facts and supporting evidence.
The accounting can therefore become one of the most important parts of a New York partition action.
The Bottom Line
If one sibling has been paying the mortgage, property taxes, or other expenses on an inherited New York property, those payments may affect how the proceeds are ultimately distributed in a partition action.
But reimbursement is not automatic.
The court may consider the nature of the expenses, the parties' ownership interests and agreements, the circumstances surrounding the payments, and—critically—the available documentation.
A co-owner considering a partition action, or responding to one, should identify these accounting issues early. In many cases, determining who paid what can be just as important as determining whether the property will ultimately be sold.
This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The application of New York partition law depends on the facts and circumstances of each matter.