Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-27-201
Sale for division authorized
Any person entitled to a partition of premises, under part 1 of this chapter, is equally entitled to have such premises sold for division, in the following cases:
- (1) If the premises are so situated that partition thereof cannot be made; or
- (2) Where the premises are of such description that it would be manifestly for the advantage of the parties that the same should be sold instead of partitioned.
Code 1858, § 3293 (deriv. Acts 1827, ch. 54, § 1; 1829, ch. 35, § 1; 1853-1854, ch. 48, § 1); Shan., § 5042; Code 1932, § 9197; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), § 23-2128.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1981–2024 · leading case: Coates v. Thompson
Coates v. Thompson (1986)
“As discussed above, there is material evidence to support that finding. Thus, the Master need not answer the additional question of whether or not the sale is to the advantage of the parties.”
Ark Land Co. v. Harper (2004)
“§ 21-45-28 (Michie 1987); Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-27-201 (Lexis 2000); Tex.”
Gober v. Burrus (1986)
“One tenant filed a Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-27-201 action in the Chancery Court for Maury County requesting that the property be sold.”
McKENZIE BANKING CO. v. Couch (2010)
“is equally entitled to have such premises sold for division, in the following cases: (1) If the premises are so situated that partition thereof cannot be made; or (2) Where the premises are of such description that it would be manifestly for the advantage of the parties that the…”
Gray v. Todd (1991)
“§ 29-27-101, in asking for a sale for division she has neither made the appropriate allegations nor offered the requisite proof required by T.C.A. §§ 29-27-201, et. seq. Accordingly, we are compelled to affirm the decree of the chancellor dismissing her complaint.”
In Re: Estate of Donald Carl Battle (2017)
“Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-27-201 . Both parties agree that the Property should not be divided in kind.”
Puryear v. Belcher (1981)
“, § 23-2128 (now § 29-27-201). The Chancellor held that T.”
Nancy Crawford v. Roger Crawford (2002)
“Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-27-201 , however, provides two conditions under which a partition sale, rather than partition in kind, is appropriate.”
Steven J. Thomas v. Jeffrey M. Thomas v. Delmus L. Thomas (2017)
“is equally entitled to have such premises sold for division, in the following cases: (1) If the premises are so situated that partition thereof cannot be made; or (2) Where the premises are of such description that it would be manifestly for the advantage of the parties that the…”
Mike Breen v. Janice C. Sharp (2017)
“Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-27-201 lists only two conditions under which a partition by sale is appropriate: (1) If the premises are so situated that partition thereof cannot be made; or (2) Where the premises are of such description that it would be manifestly for the advantage of the…”
Suzanne R. Vance v. Sally Ann Blue (2022)
“§ 29-27-201 (2012). If one of the statutory criteria is met, “a sale is justified.”
Moyers v. Moyers (1993)
“However, over a century and a half ago, the Legislature enacted the forerunner of what is now T.C.A. 29-27-201, which provides the following: 29-27-201.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-27-201(1) — 1 case
Gober v. Burrus (1986)
“One tenant filed a Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-27-201 action in the Chancery Court for Maury County requesting that the property be sold.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-27-201(2) — 1 case
Gober v. Burrus (1986)
“One tenant filed a Tenn.Code Ann. § 29-27-201 action in the Chancery Court for Maury County requesting that the property be sold.”
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.