Conveyance Cases Flashcards
Whiton: “White-out New Estates”
Estates: Maximize free alienability. You cannot create a new kind of inheritance (no new estates)
Long v. Long: “So long, it comes back”
Estates: The grantor of a Fee Tail retains a reversion on failure of issue, which is descendible, alienable, devisable, or assignable. The transfer of a lesser estate leaves the original grantor with a vested reversion in the unconveyed portion of the estate.
Pells v. Brown: “Execution of Contingencies”
Estates: Executory interests are not destroyed. BUT, contingent remainders would continue to be destructible.
Purefoy v. Rogers: “Ambiguity Destructibility”
Estates: If the interest is ambiguous and can be considered as a remainder, then it WILL be considered as a remainder and is subject to destructibility.
Charlotte Park: “Think Good Charlotte: for whiny white suburbanites only”
Estates: Charlotte had no part in the discrimination. The covenant was created by private individuals whose discriminatory motives do not violate the 14th Amendment. (No Civil Rights Act yet). To deny the validity of the reverter clause would be to deprive Barringer of his property without adequate compensation and due process in violation of the rights guaranteed to him by the 5th Amendment
Hagaman: “SC__O_”
Estates: A mere statement of the use to which the conveyed land is to be devoted is not sufficient to create a fee simple on Condition subsequent.
–When the court is faced with a choice between a fee simple determinable & a fee simple condition subsequent, the court will tend to find a FSCS. Need exact words. When a choice exists, instruments will be interpreted against forfeiture
Pabst: “Brews Before Crones”
Estates: Absent a contract to use property for a specified purpose, or to return it in the same condition it was received, a radical & permanent change of surrounding conditions must always be an important consideration upon the question whether a physical change in the use of a building constitutes waste, Ameliorative waste will generally not be considered waste.
Strittmater: “Crazy Strips Matter”
A will should not be admitted to probate if the testator was insane at the time of its execution. Testatrix apparently had an insane hatred of men. Courts are always aware that there may be public policy reasons to void a will.
–The right to take property by devise or descent is the creature of the law, and is not a natural right––a privilege, and therefore, the authority, which confers it, may impose conditions upon it.
Shapira: “Shape Up”
Wills: Court upheld provision that son marry a Jewish woman
–Most states will enforce because require something being done rather than undone
Gerbing: “No Nerfing”
(1337 for weakening something, such that it’s like a Nerf gun. NERD!)
Wills: A condition tending to encourage divorce is against the public policy and therefore should be void. Can’t have something be undone.
Spragins: “Ex can Sprag a delinquent dad”
Trusts: Absent a statute, the income of a man’s support trust may be reached to satisfy his ex-wife’s claim for child support.
1) Nondiscretionary Trust: trustee has some discretion in making payments to beneficiary
–Spendthrift Clause: preventing trust form being reached by creditors
* A spendthrift provision in a non-discretionary trust will not prevent the use of the trust funds to pay child support obligation of beneficiary
2) Testamentary Trust: established at will; no creditors allowed
–Court rules that testamentary trust can be used for child support because the language of trust clearly provides for grandchildren and corpus is significantly larger
3) Inter Vivos Trust: between living people
