Pack v. Mahan
Annotate this Case
The parties in this suit had interests in a parcel of land as tenants in common. The trial court ordered the equitable partition by sale of the parcel. Appellee Sidney C. Mahan, Jr. sought the equitable partition and sale of the property. Appellant Brittany Pack urged that statutory partition was an adequate remedy and that the property should be divided by metes and bounds. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court concluded that the property could not be fairly divided by metes and bounds, and it granted the petition for an equitable division by sale. Pack appealed. The Supreme Court agreed with Pack's argument that the trial court's order was made in error, insofar as statutory partition was an adequate remedy in this case and no peculiar circumstances required an equitable partition. "But even in a statutory partition, a court may order the sale of property that cannot be fairly divided by metes and bounds, and we see no error in the finding that the property here cannot be fairly divided." Accordingly, the Court affirmed the decision that the property be sold, but vacated the judgment to the extent that it purported to order the sale as an equitable (rather than a statutory) partition.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.