Flashcards
Uncle Donald conveys his fee simple estate, Graham Quacker Hall, “to Huey for life, then to Dewey for life, then to Looey and his heirs.” What interest does Dewey take?
A remainder of life
Huck Finn owns River Place in fee simple absolute. He conveys it “to Tom Sawyer or his life, remainder to Becky and her heirs, but if Beck predeceases Tom Sawyer, to Jim and his heirs.” What interest does Becky have in River Place?
Becky has a vested remainder subject to total divestment. It’s a remainder because because it’s created in one other than the grantor and it becomes possessory on the natural termination of the prior estate (Tom Sawyer’s life estate).
It’s vested because it’s created in an ascertained living being and is not subject to a condition precedent.
It’s subject to total divestment because it’s subject to a condition subsequent-if Becky predeceases Tom, Jim and his heirs “divest” Becky’s interest.
Other interests created: T gets LE, J gets EI
Richard III owns London Tower in fee simple absolute. He conveys it “to my nephew Eddie for life; then to my nephew Richie and his heirs.” Since Richie may predecease Eddie and thus never personally possess London Tower, it Richie’s remainder a vested remainder subject to total divestment?
No, it is an indefeasibly vested remainder, since it is certain that Richie or his heirs, assignees, or devisees will come into possession of London Tower. It is irrelevant that Richie himself may never possess London Tower.
F conveys his fee simple estate Arden, “to Celia for her life, then to Orlando for his life,” Is Orlando’s life estate an indefeasibly vested remainder?
No, although some courts would say it is.
106 King Arthur owns Camelot in fee simple absolute. He conveys Camelot “to Genevieve for life; then to Launcelot and his heirs, but if Launcelot dies w/o issue surviving him, Camelot shall revert to King Arthur and his heirs.” What is lancelet’s interest in Camelot
A vested remainder subject to total divestment.
It’s vested, bc it’s created in a person in being and is not subject to a condition precendent; and it’s subject to total divest meant bc if Launcelot dies wo suvicing issue, his estate will be divested in favor of King Arthur
H conveys his fee simple estate, Hamelin Town “to Piper and his heirs, but if Piper ever brings musical instruments into the premises, to Roe Dentt and her heirs.” Is Roe’s interest void due to the Rule Against Perpetuities?
P: FS/EL
R: Ex. Interest (in FSA)—-shifting
RAP does not apply because Roe’s interest must vest or fail within Pipe’s lifetime.
Mr. Dithers conveys by deed his fee simple estate, Sandwich Place, “to Dagwood Bumstead for life, then to Alexander and his heirs if, and only if, Alexander reaches 18.” At the time of the conveyance, Alexander is 5 years old. Is Alexander’s interest valid under RAP?
D: LE
A: Contingent Remainder
Mr. Dithers: Reversion (in FSA).
Ed Davis devises his fee simple estate, Springfield, “to Miss Thomas for life, then to Jim Anderson’s children, but if any of Jim’s children fail to reach 30, those shares shall pass to the survivors.” At the time of the grant, Jim has two children aged 15 and 20. Is the grant invalid due to the Rule Against Perpetuities?
Part is: the divesting condition (failure to reach 30) and the executory interest (in the surviving children)
M: life estate
Jim’s children: vested remainder subject to total divestment
Heathcliff conveys his property, Withering Heights, “to C and her heirs, but if the property is ever used as a home for unwed mothers, to Linton and his heirs.” What is Cathy’s interest in the property?
She has a fee simple absolute.
The grant creates a fee simple defeasible in Cathhy subject to a divesting condition. Linton has an executory interest. Linton’s interest is void under RAP.
Carlos Ramirez grants his fee simple estate, San Tanco Place, “to Convent San Tanco so long as the premises are used as a convent; then to Sally Bertrille and her heirs.” Is Sally’s interest valid under the RAP?
No. The grant creates a fee simple subject to an executory interest in Convent San Tanco and a shifting executory interest in Sally. Sally’s interest is void because it violates the RAP. Since Sally’s interest is voided, and the prior estate was subject to a divesting condition via language sufficient to create a determinable fee independent of the limitation of the executory interest, the Convent is left with a defeasible fee and Ramirez and his heirs are left with a possibility of reverter.
Alfred Bellows owns Cocoa Beach Manor in FSA. He conveys Cocoa Beach “to R for life, then to T’s first child to reach 21, before or after T’s death.” T is childless when the conveyance takes place. Is the interest in Nelson’s child valid under RAP?
Yes, bc its contingent remainder must vest or fail within a life in being plus 21 years-namely, T’s. Not that it’s T’s life that is the life in being here, not R’s. Thus, the contingent remainder in Nelson’s child is valid under RAP.
What is a vested remainder subject to total (or complete) divestment?
It is a future interest, created in a party other than the grantor, which is:
- created in a person ascertained and “in being”
- subject to a condition subsequent, but not a condition precedent. (In other words, nothing stops him from taking possession, but something can take it away.)
What is a vested remainder subject to partial divestment (aka vested remainder subject to open)?
It is a future interest in the form of a remainder which is:
- created in a “class” of persons (i.e., children_
- at least one of whom is ascertained and in existence;
- which is certain to become possessory when preceding estates terminate;
- and is capable of being diminished by others entering the class.
Common example: Remainder to children of a living person; remainder is vested when first child is born, but can be diminished proportionately as other children are born, until the “class” closes.
ESCAPED: existence; class; ascertained; possession certain; diminished)
