Foppiano v. Valera

18. Foppiano v. Valera

**Citation:** A172112 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. Feb. 5, 2026), 2026 WL 306372

Relevant Facts

• Partition action involving a 5,200-acre parcel in Mendocino County, California.

• Eleven people and trusts hold interests in the property.

• All parties agreed the property should be partitioned but disagreed on the method.

• Plaintiffs sought partition by sale; Valera sought physical partition (in-kind) to retain parcels containing her primary residence.

Legal Issues

Whether partition by sale rather than physical partition is the appropriate method.

Decision by the Court

The California Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's order granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs and ordering partition by sale.

Reasons for the Decision

Partition in kind is favored in law, but the presumption is rebuttable if partition by sale "would be more equitable." Uncontradicted expert evidence established that the property had numerous owners with unequal interests, unsuitable topography, limited water, and little flat terrain. Divided parcels frequently do not equal the whole's value.