A writ of partition issued under section 5307.04 of the Revised Code may be directed to the sheriff of any of the counties in which any part of the estate lies and shall command the sheriff that, by the oaths of the commissioner or commissioners, the sheriff shall cause to be set off and divided to the plaintiff or each interested party, whatever part and proportion of the estate as the court of common pleas orders.
The oaths of the commissioner or commissioners may be administered by the sheriff.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: McCarthy v. Lippitt, 781 N.E.2d 1023 (Ohio Ct. App. 7th Dist. 2002).
McCarthy v. Lippitt, 781 N.E.2d 1023 (Ohio Ct. App. 7th Dist. 2002). “{¶ 32} Appellees’ arguments are both correct. First, it was ultimately the decision of the trial court to order physical partition or a judicial sale of the property, regardless of the opinion of the commissioners.”
Thrasher v. Watts, 2011-Ohio-2844, 952 N.E.2d 1207. ““If the court of common pleas finds that the plaintiff * * * has a legal right to any part of the estate, it shall order partition of the estate in favor of the plaintiff or all interested parties, appoint one suitable disinterested person to be the commissioner to make the…”
Stephan v. Wacaster, 2023-Ohio-4566. “{¶ 16} In the present case, the trial court’s April 2, 2023 order was styled as a “writ of partition,” it appears to have been intended as such, and it met the requirements for a writ of partition found in R.C. 5307.05. Unlike Haynes, the only contingency the trial court’s…”
Haynes v. Haynes, 2017-Ohio-49. “04 may be directed to the sheriff of any of the counties in which any part of the estate lies and shall command the sheriff that, by the oaths of the commissioner or commissioners, the sheriff shall cause to be set off and divided to the plaintiff or each interested party,…”
Reel v. Reel, 2013-Ohio-2624. “” R.C. 5307.05. {¶11} In the present case, an order of partition as described in R.”
Thrasher v. Watts, 2013-Ohio-2581. “R.C. 5307.05. Where a deed is silent, there is a rebuttable presumption that the parties took equal interests in the property.”
Bordenkircher v. Baker, 2023-Ohio-1770. “R.C. 5307.05. Coshocton County, Case No. 2022CA0023 12 {¶19} As set forth in our Statement of the Case and Facts, supra, Appellee moved out of the Property sometime in April, 2017.”
Richter v. Richter, 2025-Ohio-880, 268 N.E.3d 24. “See R.C. 5307.05, 5307.09. {¶ 32} As noted, the question of partition is equitable in nature and the trial court had broad discretion to fashion a fair remedy in this case.”
Fontanarosa v. Connors, 2021-Ohio-2346. “2012 CA 50, 2013-Ohio-2581, ¶ 12 ; R.C. 5307.05. If the deed is silent, there is a rebuttable presumption that the parties took equal interests in the property.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.