Not always. If your partner holds title to the home alone but bought it for both of you, and you relied on that and contributed to the household, a Housing Court judge can find that your partner holds the home in a constructive trust for you and deny the eviction. In a July 2025 case, the Appeals Court upheld exactly that result. This is an unpublished Appeals Court decision under Rule 23.0, which courts may cite as persuasive but not as binding precedent.
What happened
The owner and the occupant were in a long-term relationship and had children together. The owner bought the home in 2009 for the benefit of the occupant and their children, and the title ended up in his name alone. The occupant lived there throughout, never had a rent agreement, and paid the electric, gas, cable, internet, and for years the water bills, while the owner paid the mortgage. When the owner could not, she did whatever the house needed. The owner later filed an eviction case against her. He won at first, but on an earlier appeal the Appeals Court sent the case back for the judge to decide the occupant’s equitable defense. On remand, the judge ruled that the owner held the home in constructive trust for the occupant and entered judgment for her on possession.
What the court decided
The Appeals Court affirmed in Walker v. Pierre, No. 24-P-566 (Mass. App. Ct. July 2, 2025) (Rule 23.0 decision).
What a constructive trust is. Courts impose a constructive trust to prevent unjust enrichment when someone breaches a fiduciary duty and gains property at the expense of the person owed that duty. See Sullivan v. Rooney, 404 Mass. 160 (1989). A fiduciary duty does not have to be a formal one, like a lawyer’s duty to a client. It can arise from a relationship of trust and confidence. See Maffei v. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Boston, 449 Mass. 235 (2007).
Why it applied here. The judge credited the occupant’s testimony that the owner bought the home for her and the children, that she trusted him, and that she believed the home was always theirs together. She lived there for over a decade, paid bills, and kept the house going. The Appeals Court found no clear error in the finding of a fiduciary relationship and no abuse of discretion in imposing the trust. It compared the case to Sullivan, where an unmarried partner who contributed earnings and work to a home titled in the other partner’s name, relying on his promises of shared ownership, was awarded a share of the home.
Testimony can be enough. The owner argued the occupant had no documents backing her story. The court said a witness’s testimony alone, if believed, can meet the burden of proof.
Arguments waived. The owner argued the defense was barred by the three year limitations period in G.L. c. 260, § 2A. He never raised that in the trial court, so it was waived. The court added that he offered no authority that a limitations period applies to a defense rather than a claim. His request for use and occupancy payments while his appeal was pending was also waived because he gave no legal support for it.
What this means for you
When a couple splits up, the person whose name is on the deed sometimes treats the other like a tenant and files an eviction. This decision shows that title is not the end of the question. If the home was bought for both of you, you trusted the promise that it was yours too, and you put money and work into it, you may have an equitable defense in Housing Court.
These cases turn on facts and credibility. The judge must believe your account. Your own testimony can be enough, but records of what you paid and did make your case stronger. And the owner’s arguments failed in part because they were not raised at the right time. Raise your defenses in the trial court, in writing, from the start.
A constructive trust is not automatic. Living with a partner is not enough by itself. In this case the court relied on a relationship of real trust and confidence, reliance on a promise of shared ownership, and your contributions to the home.
What to do now
- If you get an eviction notice from a partner or former partner, do not move out just because the deed is in their name.
- File an answer on time and raise constructive trust and any other equitable defense in writing.
- Gather proof: utility bills you paid, repair receipts, texts or letters about the home being “ours,” and people who heard those promises.
- Write a timeline of when the home was bought, who paid what, and what was said about ownership.
- Ask whether a separate case about ownership of the home should be filed alongside the eviction defense.
If this is your situation, call Doubleday Law at (617) 575-2006 or tell us what happened. Housing Court deadlines are short.
