Three recognized forms of co-ownership
Under D.C. Code § 42-516, the District authorizes three types of concurrent real property ownership. Tenancy in common is the default — two or more people holding equal or unequal undivided shares with no right of survivorship at all. Joint tenancy, sometimes written as JTWROS, must be expressly created; a DC deed to two or more owners creates a tenancy in common unless it specifically provides for a different form, typically through language like "as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common." Tenancy by the entirety is available specifically to spouses or registered domestic partners — a notably inclusive detail extending this protective form of ownership beyond married couples alone.
A real case over a deed that pulled in two directions
A genuinely recent DC Court of Appeals decision, In re Hamilton, shows how these rules actually play out when a deed's own language creates real ambiguity. The deed in question used language that purported to create a tenancy by the entirety, while also separately mentioning survivorship rights elsewhere in the document — two references that didn't cleanly line up with each other. After one of the co-owners, James Hamilton, died, his estate and the surviving co-owner, Eric Hamilton, disagreed about what the deed actually established.
Intent over mechanical application
James Hamilton's estate argued that the probate court had incorrectly relied on James Hamilton's personal intent when interpreting the deed, and that the relevant DC statute should instead control the deed's meaning directly, without reference to intent. The DC Court of Appeals disagreed and affirmed the lower court's approach. The probate court had looked to James Hamilton's intent, as expressed through the deed's overall language — including both the tenancy-by-the-entirety phrasing and the separately mentioned survivorship rights — and determined that Eric Hamilton had become the sole owner of the property after James Hamilton's death.
Why this matters for anyone drafting or relying on a deed
This case is a genuinely useful, real illustration of how DC courts approach a deed that doesn't speak with one clear, consistent voice about survivorship. Rather than picking whichever single statutory category the language most literally matches and stopping there, DC courts will look at the fuller context and apparent intent behind the deed's wording. For anyone drafting a DC deed, this is also a caution: using inconsistent or overlapping terminology — naming one form of tenancy while separately describing features of another — risks creating exactly the kind of ambiguity that led to real, contested litigation in this case.
Tenancy in common as the fallback
Without clear survivorship language, or when a deed's mixed language ultimately can't be read as expressing a clear intent for survivorship, DC presumes a tenancy in common. Each owner's share in a tenancy in common becomes part of their own individual probate estate at death, rather than passing automatically to the other co-owners.
A separate, more modern tool for real estate
None of this changes the fact that DC also offers a completely separate route for keeping real estate out of probate. See our guide to the DC transfer-on-death deed for how that tool works alongside these joint ownership rules.