Dividing Rights in Land by Use

Question 1

Do interests change their name when they pass from one person to another?

Answer 1

They can change names as events occur but they do not change names as one passes them along to another person

Question 2

What are the 3 rules of seisin?

Answer 2

1. No abeyance (a state of temporary disuse)- seisin has to be somewhere, tied to someone all the time
2. No springing in futuro- there is an event/ ceremony for the delivery of seisin, during which the seisin will pass or not pass at all
3. No shifting from grantee1 to grantee2 by a condition divesting grantee1- no conditions in strangers- the condition cannot terminate the estate at the hands of grantee1 and turn the seisin over to grantee2

Question 3

Before and after 1536, can a freehold future interest in a transferee, be a remainder if it could cause seisin to spring from O in the future (“no springing in futuro”)?

Answer 3

No

Question 4

Before and after 1536, can a freehold future interest in a transferee, be a remainder if it cut short a previous estate by a condition (causes seisin to shift from one vested transferee to another at the unnatural termination of the preceding estate)?

Answer 4

No. “No conditions in strangers”

Question 5

Before and after 1536, can a freehold future interest in a transferee, be a remainder if it follow a vested fee simple?

Answer 5

No. Nothing in a vested transferee could follow a fee simple

Question 6

What are the 2 situations in which remainders are contingent?

Answer 6

1. there is no ascertainable taker Or
2. the interest is subject to an unsatisfied condition precedent other than the natural termination of the preceding estate

Question 7

When is a condition considered to be “precedent”?

Answer 7

it depends on where it is in the sentence compared to the grant to the remainder person- it is a precedent if:
• it appears before the taker of the interest or
• is woven into the gift to the taker. (e.g., “to B if she reaches 21”)

Question 8

If O conveys “to A for life, then to B for life, and then to C and C’s heirs.” What do A, B, and C have?

Answer 8

A: has title to the life estate and is possessory now
B: remainder for life (future interest)
C: remainder in fee simple (future interest)

Question 9

O conveys “to A for life, then in the event of A’s death to B for life, and after the death of both A and B then to C and C’s heirs.” Are there any conditions precedent? Are B’s and C’s remainders vested?

Answer 9

There are no conditions precedent. The “conditions” are surplusage because they merely describe the natural termination of the previous life estate (they do not add any new conditions)

They are vested.

Question 10

O conveys “to A for life, then in the event of A’s death to B for life, and after the death of both A and B then to C and C’s heirs,” then C conveys C’s interest to O. What does O have?

Answer 10

O has a vested remainder in fee simple. O is the original grantor so it didn’t change names.

Question 11

O conveys “to A for life, then in the event of A’s death to B for life, and after the death of both A and B then to C and C’s heirs,” then C conveys C’s interest to O but O retained an interest, what does O have?

Answer 11

O would have a reversion or some reversionary interest

Question 12

: O conveys “to A for life, then to A’s children and
their heirs.” A has no children.
Is there a remainder?

Answer 12

Yes

Question 13

O conveys “to A for life, then to A’s children and

their heirs.” A has no children. What kind of remainder is there and who holds the remainder?

Answer 13

• it’s a contingent remainder in fee simple because the person who’s going to take is not ascertained (there is no child of A)
• it’s “held in the bosom of the law” waiting for someone to take it

Question 14

O conveys “to A for life, then to A’s children and
their heirs.” A has no children.
Does O have anything?

Answer 14

Yes, he has a reversion because O hasn’t given away all of his rights
O had a vested fee simple, he transferred an interest in fee simple, but O did not transfer a vested interest in fee simple

Question 15

O conveys “to A for life, then to A’s children and
their heirs.” Next, B is born to A.
What does B have?

Answer 15

B has a vested remainder in fee simple subject to open
It’s a future interest.
Vested because we now can point to the person who is going to take it.
Open because it is possible another child will be born

Question 16

O conveys “to A for life, then to A’s children and
their heirs.” Next, B is born to A.
What does O have?

Answer 16

O had a vested interest in fee simple but now has nothing left. O had a reversion but it was wiped out once B was born

Question 17

O conveys “to A for life, then to A’s children and

their heirs.” B is born to A. Next, C is born to A. What happens?

Answer 17

C has a vested remainder in fee simple subject to open (along with B). C and B share since they are both children of A.

Question 18

O conveys “to A for life, then to A’s children and

their heirs.” B is born to A. C is born to A. A dies. Who takes?

Answer 18

B and C will take together- it’s a concurrent interest. Their future interest will become possessory

Question 19

“To A for life, then to A’s children and their heirs,
but if A is not survived by issue then to C.” A has one child, B.
What does B have?

Answer 19

Vested remainder in fee simple subject to open and subject to complete
divestment (or complete defeasance).

Question 20

“To A for life, then to A’s children and their heirs,

but if A is not survived by issue then to C.” A has one child, B. How would B’s interest be divested?

Answer 20

If B dies before A and no other children or issue of A survive A, then C may take then we don’t have a

Question 21

Do courts always follow the common law rules?

Answer 21

No

Question 22

Will courts sometimes construe the words of a will very strictly
even if the result seems unjust, and perhaps not what the
testator wanted?

Answer 22

sometimes

Question 23

Is a contingent remainder usually transferrable inter vivos

today?

Answer 23

Yes although that was not the case in the past

Question 24

O conveys Greenacre “to T to the use of B.” Who is

the owner?

Answer 24

O is not because he transferred. T has legal title after the transfer. B has the use of Greenacre. The court said that T must use the land for the benefit of B. Who the “owner” is depends on who you ask- T is the owner at law and B is the owner at equity

Question 25

O conveys Greenacre “to T to the use of B”.

What is the idea?

Answer 25

Creates a division of ownership:
• legal owner has legal powers and duties- manages the asset,
• beneficial owner has rights to benefit
(same idea with trusts)

Question 26

Before 1536, O conveys “to T for the use of A and
A’s heirs until A drinks liquor, then for the use of B and her heirs.” [Cf. Ex 35] If we don’t have T involved, could B get a remainder?

Answer 26

No. You can’t have a remainder following a fee simple interest.

Question 27

Before 1536, O conveys “to T for the use of A and
A’s heirs until A drinks liquor, then for the use of B and her heirs.”
Who would the court at law say hold title and what is the title? Chancellor?

Answer 27

COL: T is the title holder. He has Fee Simple Absolute; T has seisin

Chancellor: A has the use in fee simple subject to a shifting use in B.
B has a shifting use in fee simple

Question 28

What was the purpose of including “use” terms?

Answer 28

1. Could create freehold future interests that were impossible at
   law:
   – springing out of O in futuro
   – cutting short (unnaturally terminating) a freehold estate with a
   condition benefitting a grantee
   – following a FS
2. Could transfer without a formal public ceremony
   – Could sell without livery of seisin on the land (by “bargain and sale” deed): In London, O
   “bargains and sells Blackacre in Norwich to A and A’s heirs.”
   – Could hold for a family member (by a covenant to stand seised): O “covenants to stand
   seised of Blackacre for the benefit of daughter A when she gives birth to a child.”
3. Could transfer land at death by will, which was not allowed at law
   – Example: O enfeoffs “T and T’s heirs to the use of O for life and then to whomever O
   designates in a writing delivered to T.”
4. Avoided forfeiture for treason and escheat for felony (misbehaviors by holder of
   benefit).
5. uses could be used to reduce feudal
   incidents. Example: In 1500, O transfers “to T, U, V, W, X, Y, and Z, to the use of A and his heirs.”
   – T, U, V, W, X, Y, and Z hold legal FS title. A holds equitable title in FS.
   – This “use” avoids feudal incidents when A dies. A does not have
   seisin. A’s death does not trigger incidents.