In Finney v. Gomez (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 527, the court declined to expand the rule set forth in Cassel v. Sullivan, Roche & Johnson (1999) to an action for partition to divide a tenancy in common. The defendant had moved out of state and had ceased to fulfill his financial obligations on certain real property. Those obligations continued to accrue during the course of the litigation, since property expenses such as taxes, maintenance, repairs and utility costs were ongoing. (Id. at p. 610.)