Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 8-881 / 08-0343 Filed November 13, 2008

PATRICK R. COYLE, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. PATRICIA D. KUJACZYNSKI and PHH MORTGAGE SERVICES, Defendants-Appellants. ________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Johnson County, Marsha Bergan, Judge.

Patricia D. Kujaczynski appeals from the district court's decree directing the partition of her homestead by sale and the equal division of its sale proceeds with her joint tenant. AFFIRMED.

Gregg Geerdes, Iowa City, for appellant. David E. Brown and Benjamin P. Hayek of Hayek, Brown, Moreland & Hayek, L.L.P., Iowa City, for appellee.

Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Eisenhauer and Doyle, JJ.

2 DOYLE, J. Patricia D. Kujaczynski appeals from the district court's decree directing the partition of her homestead by sale and the equal division of its sale proceeds with her joint tenant. Kujaczynski contends the district court erred because her homestead interest in the home precluded any involuntary partition sale of the property. Alternatively, Kujaczynski maintains she is entitled to a greater share of the sale proceeds. Upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the district court. I. Background Facts and Proceedings. Kujaczynski and Patrick R. Coyle, an unmarried couple, bought a home together in 1997 as joint tenants with full rights of survivorship. They resided together in the home until 2005 when Coyle ended the relationship and moved out. Coyle offered to sell his interest in the property to Kujaczynski, who still lived in the home, and he alternatively proposed that they sell the property and split the proceeds. Kujaczynski rejected both suggestions, and Coyle filed a partition action to force a sale of the property. Kujaczynski claimed her homestead

interest in the home precluded any involuntary sale of the property by a partition action. Alternatively, Kujaczynski maintained she was entitled to a greater share of the sale proceeds. Neither of the parties requested that the property be

partitioned in kind. Following a trial on the matter, the district court entered a decree ordering the partition of the property by sale, finding that it was impracticable to divide the property in kind, and ordering that its sale proceeds be divided equally between the parties.

3 Kujaczynski appeals. Kujaczynski contends the district court erred in

ordering the sale of the home, and alternatively, ordering an equal division of its sale proceeds. II. Scope and Standards of Review. An action to partition real property is an equitable proceeding. Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.1201(1). Therefore, our review is de novo. Iowa R. App. P. 6.4. In equity cases, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, we give weight to the fact findings of the district court, but are not bound by them. Iowa R. App. P. 6.14(6)(g). III. Discussion. Kujaczynski contends the district court erred because her homestead interest in the property she jointly owns with Coyle precluded any involuntary partition sale of the property. Alternatively, Kujaczynski maintains she is entitled to a greater share of the sale proceeds. For the following reasons, we disagree. A. Partition of Property Designated as Homestead. Before addressing the issues presented by Kujaczynski, we set forth the general principles applicable to homestead law in Iowa. "Homestead laws are creatures of public policy, designed to promote the stability and welfare of the state by preserving a home where the family may be sheltered and live beyond the reach of economic misfortune." Merchants Mut. Bonding Co. v. Underberg, 291 N.W.2d 19, 21 (Iowa 1980) (citing 40 Am. Jur. 2d Homestead

Download PATRICK R. COYLE, Plaintiff - Appellee, vs. PATRICIA D. KUJACZYNSKI and PHH M

Iowa Law