Short answer. The court equitably taxes and apportions the costs and expenses — including commissioner compensation — among the parties, taking their respective interests into account, and execution may issue to collect those costs just as in other cases. There is no fixed formula; the allocation is left to the court's judgment on the specific facts of each partition case.
What the law says
The court shall equitably tax and apportion between or among the parties the costs and expenses which accrue in the action, including the compensation of the commissioners, having regard to the interests of the parties, and execution may issue therefor as in other cases.
Rule 69, Section 10 — Costs and expenses to be taxed and collected. Read the full provision →
Costs are apportioned, not automatically split evenly
The rule does not impose a fixed formula for dividing the costs of a partition action. Instead, the court equitably taxes and apportions the costs and expenses that accrue in the action between or among the parties, giving the court flexibility to allocate based on the actual circumstances of the case, rather than defaulting to an equal split regardless of each party's share in the property being partitioned or their role in prolonging the proceedings with unnecessary objections, motions, or appeals along the way.
Commissioner compensation is included
Those apportioned costs and expenses expressly include the compensation of the commissioners appointed to carry out the partition, so co-owners should expect commissioner fees to be factored into the overall cost allocation rather than treated as a separate, unallocated expense that falls on just one party. The commissioners are paid out of the very same pool of costs the court divides among the co-owners at the end of the case, and that fee is generally proportionate to the time, travel, and effort the appointment actually required of them throughout the proceedings. This apportionment obligation binds the court itself, not the parties; a co-owner cannot unilaterally decide what portion of the costs to pay, since the actual allocation depends on the court's own assessment of each party's interest and conduct in the proceedings.
The interests of the parties guide the apportionment, and execution enforces it
The court apportions these costs having regard to the interests of the parties, meaning a co-owner with a larger stake in the property might reasonably bear a larger share of the total. Once apportioned, execution may issue to collect the costs from whichever party owes them, just as it would in any other case, so the allocation is enforceable through the ordinary machinery for collecting a money judgment, not merely advisory guidance the losing party is free to ignore or delay paying indefinitely without any real consequence for doing so.
Related provisions
- Rule 69, Section 10 — Costs and expenses to be taxed and collected
- Rule 69, Section 4 — Oath and duties of commissioners
- Rule 69, Section 6 — Report of commissioners; proceedings not binding until confirmed