Defendant's Attorney:

Description:

Biddeford, Maine real estate lawyers represented the parties in partition.

Keep and Indorf were unmarried domestic partners and have one child together. In October 2015, they purchased a residence in Saco as joint tenants for $345,000. Indorf contributed $37,327 of his own funds for the down payment and closing costs; Keep did not contribute any funds to the initial purchase. The remainder of the purchase was funded with a loan secured by a mortgage on the property; both parties were liable on the note and mortgage. When the parties purchased the property, they agreed that in the event of a sale, Indorf would receive from any sale proceeds an amount equal to his down payment before any funds were divided between the parties.

[¶3] The relationship broke down and Keep moved out in May 2019, at which point the home was valued at $377,000. Indorf stayed in the home and assumed sole financial responsibility for it from that point forward. At the time, the mortgage balance was $290,413.64. Keep incurred her own housing costs after she moved out.

[¶4] Keep filed a complaint for equitable partition on May 9, 2019. The parties also litigated a parental rights and responsibilities matter, a claim for breach of contract regarding the down payment made for the house, and a small claims case regarding personal property. Although never formally consolidated, the four cases were jointly scheduled for a status conference (Moskowitz, J.) on October 3, 2019. The status conference morphed into a judicial settlement conference for all four causes of action.

[¶5] The parties did not settle everything, but they came to an interim agreement in the family matter that Keep's attorney read the into the record. Then, after telling the court that the parties were "segueing over to the partition matter," Keep's attorney stated,

The parties have agreed for valuation and division of any expenses associated with the home, that it - they will use May 1st as the date that Mr. Indorf had fully assumed all responsibility for the residence. Likewise, Mr. Indorf will provide indemnification for any construction on the house that's presently occurring . . . . Mr. Indorf will provide general information about the scope of construction that's currently happening at the house and the expected end date.[1]

[¶6] While the partition action was pending, Indorf's claim for breach of contract, which concerned the down payment, was dismissed on Keep's motion for judgment on the pleadings. Indorf v. Keep, 2023 ME 11, ¶ 7, 288 A.3d 1214; see M.R. Civ. P. 12(c). The contract action was then appealed to us. See Indorf, 2023 ME 11, 288 A.3d 1214. On January 31, 2023, we vacated the dismissal of the contract action and remanded with instructions to the trial court "to use all
appropriate trial management tools and practices available to resolve any remaining issues that were not addressed in its judgment entered in Keep's partition action." Id. ¶¶ 11, 14.

[¶7] The partition action was set for trial on September 1, 2022, with the contract action still pending before us. Before trial, Indorf moved to exclude evidence of the property's increase in value after May 1, 2019, based on the October 2019 settlement agreement. The court denied the motion, deciding that the parties could present evidence of the property value because the existence of the agreement was at issue in the hearing.

Outcome: Vacated and remanded.

Keep v. Indorf, 2024 ME 14, Yor-23-59 (Me. Jan 31, 2024)

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: