Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Paul Burt v. Nancy Skrzyniarz

Date: 01-31-2000

Case Number: S99A1824

Judge: Unknown

Court: Unknown

Plaintiff's Attorney: Unknown

Defendant's Attorney: Unknown

Description:
Real Estate - Tenants in common - Burt and Skrzyniarz began seeing one another in 1990, and in
1997 took possession of a home located in Dutch Island, Georgia.
It is conceded that the parties took possession of the house as
tenants in common, and that the sales contract for the home
obligated them both as purchasers of the property. In fact, a
hand written disclosure on the sales contract, initialed by both
parties, states that "Purchaser [Skrzyniarz] is a licensed real
estate agent in Pennsylvania" (emphasis added). The warranty deed
identified both Burt and Skrzyniarz as the grantees of the
property, and the parties jointly took possession of the property.
When the parties separated, Burt filed a complaint for statutory
partitioning, in which he alleged that while the parties did in
fact hold the property as tenants in common, he held a 99 percent
interest in the property, as opposed to Skrzyniarz's one percent
interest. She disputed that claim in her answer, and the case was
tried before a jury in February 1999.



Testimony at the trial was heard from the real estate agent
who represented Burt and Skrzyniarz in their purchase of the
property, who stated that she was under the impression that the
property would be held jointly, and also from three other
witnesses who each testified that Burt had represented to them
that he and Skrzyniarz would own the home together and that she
would be ensured of having her own home after the purchase was
completed. Additionally, evidence was introduced showing that
around the time of the purchase, Skrzyniarz deposited $29,000 into
the couple's joint checking account, and that this money was used
for household purposes.

Outcome:
The jury rejected Burt's allegations of unequal shares and found that the parties held equal ownership interests in the property.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Unknown
Defendant's Experts:
Unknown
Comments:
Affirmed by the Supreme Court of Georgia. See: ___ Ga. ___ (2000), ___ S.E.2d ___. Note: The above date reflects the appellate court decision date, not the original trial date. Reported by kkm.

About This Case

What was the outcome of Paul Burt v. Nancy Skrzyniarz?

The outcome was: The jury rejected Burt's allegations of unequal shares and found that the parties held equal ownership interests in the property.

Which court heard Paul Burt v. Nancy Skrzyniarz?

This case was heard in Unknown, GA. The presiding judge was Unknown.

Who were the attorneys in Paul Burt v. Nancy Skrzyniarz?

Plaintiff's attorney: Unknown. Defendant's attorney: Unknown.

When was Paul Burt v. Nancy Skrzyniarz decided?

This case was decided on January 31, 2000.