Curtis and Bruce Wenzel jointly owned land, buildings, and machinery used for agricultural purposes. After Bruce died, Curtis and Bruce's estate could not agree on how to sell or partition the assets. Curtis continued to use the machinery without paying rent to the estate, but paid certain bills related to the care of the assets. The estate disputed the need for several of the bills paid by Curtis. The dispute over the assets went to trial. The court divided the land and ordered Curtis to buy out the estate's share of the machinery for $74,300-after the court had made adjustments for use and expenses.
Curtis appealed, contending that as a matter of law the court could not order him to pay the estate for half the value of the jointly owned machinery. Is it reasonable for the court to use such powers in equity in this manner? [Bruce J. Wenzel Estate v. Wenzel 747 N.W.2d 103, Sup. Ct., N.D. (2008)]