Replies

Would it not give them a claim on 50% of the property RG? What can they do about Laci's half which should vest to her estate? How can they foreclose on 50% of the property. To me it sounds like it may come down to a Court Ordered Sale and then Laci's half would go to her heirs and the other 50% could pay the debts. Surely there is a way in CA or any other state for that matter to secure a Joint Tenants portion of a piece of property. Here we call it a Lis Pendens and/or a Certificate of Pending Litigation. Until those charges are discharged, somebody has to be paid out before the property is free to do anything with. Also, since we believe Snott will be found Guilty, he can't profit in any way so are the Peterson's foreclosing on themselves? Way different. I understand what you mean with the P/A. They can do anything Scott could do if he wasn't indisposed. But liquidating and encumbering a jointly owned piece of property seems terrible to me. Here, the estate would have to be settled first.

Here, the estate would have to be settled first.

Given the circumstances, I'm sure the same is true here, too. The Rochas will see to that. My comments were more aimed at the intentions of the Petersons and their vindictive nature. I don't think it's coincidental that SP gets held over for trial and on the same day the Petersons start piling paperwork up on the house he shared with Laci.

But I think, CO, that if Scott and Laci owned that house as joint tenants with right of survivorship, then on the death of one tenant, the other tenant succeeds to ownership of the whole thing.

First thing to consider is that there is probably not that much equity in the house to begin with. So it is probably not that large a sum of money that we are talking about here.

Secondly, the way for the Rochas to collect what Laci is due is to file a civil injury suit against Scott for murdering her. If they won such a suit, they could collect against all of Scott's assets--not just against "Laci's half". In the meantime, as to things which Laci owned separately, I guess it would depend on whether she had a will.

All in all, there may not be all that many assets there. And I dearly hope that any remaining assets Scott owns end up being seized by the Rochas to help pay a judgment against him.

Would it not give them a claim on 50% of the property RG?

Technically, SP owns the place because he is the surviving joint tennant as DA has stated. They did hold title as joint tennants. There are laws and civil remedies that will prevent him from getting Laci's half if he is deemed to have caused her death. BUT as far as the Petersons are concerned, I don't if the laws address liens on the property by family members of the accused. Might be a loophole.