*II. REAL PROPERTY- Estates and Future Interests Flashcards
Waste doctrine:
life estate tenant doesn’t have right to change fundamental character or to diminish the economic value of prop (can be affirmative (actions) or permissive (nonaction)); Remedy: triple damages (a big deal)
a) Brokaw v Fairchild:
any conduct of tenant that does permanent injury to inheritance is waste
i) F: wanted to tear down house and build apt (Manhattan)not allowed since testator made clear that his ‘residence’ (land and house) were part of life estate; to build apt would injure to remainder interests
ii) exception to waste doctrine
ameliorative waste: if prop reaches point where it essentially has no value
iii) waste doctrine designed to:
protect future interests, even at expense of present owner
Melms
Court allowed life estate grantee to tear down house since industrial develop around the prop had isolated house, making it incompatible w/ times and circumstances (almost valueless)
2) Contingent Remainders
a) Destructibility rule: all cont. rem. required to vest at or before termination of preceding estate or they were destroyedmost states have abolished rule
i) Abo:
can only transfer whatever interests you have in prop; in this case, original owners only had reversion after 1st deed so they couldn’t transfer fee simple in 2d
(1) F: original deed: sisters granted life estates and remainder for children if they had children; subsequent deed (before children) seemed to grant sisters fee simple; children claim sisters couldn’t grant fee simple to Abo since interests couldn’t be destroyed–>for children; subsequent deed didn’t destroy cont. rem.s
b) Transfer of Remainders
Rutherford v Keith:
O (will)wife for life, then to Medie for life should wife die before and Medie hasn’t married, then to bros and heirs if bros outlive wife, and to bros children (‘ants) and heirs should they die before wife; Medie attempted to give fee simple ownership to predecessor of ‘ees’–>for children; Medie’s interests terminated when she got married; bros interests terminated when they died before wife; children’s interests vested at that point
(1) children could have transferred ∆ their remainders
3) Class Gift:
O–>A for life, then to the children of A and their heirs
i) “children” makes remainder contingent, but there is possibility that A will have more children after transfer
(1) non-living child: contingent remainder, living child: vested remainder subject to open (share not fixed)
b) Trust
Deiss:
trust would end (ownership starts) only after mortgage paid; π argued that remainder interest couldn’t vest until mortgage had been paid in full (contingent precedent), thus against RAP–>remainder interests vested when trust was created
ii) RAP doesn’t apply to charitable trusts, so what constitutes a charitable trust?
(1) Educational purposes
(a) Taylor: Court concluded that a will that left proceeds to each student each year (class gift) was not a charitable trust and therefore subject RAP
(i) just giving money to students does not constitute giving for education purposes
c) Current State of RAP
i) mainly acted as penalty for bad writingcourts began to construe ambiguous language to reflect intentions
(1) wait and see rule: don’t decide if interests is valid at time of creation; if interest vest w/in period = valid
(2) USRAP rule: rather than a life + 21just a flat 90 years after creation
(3) no RAP for any trust so long as prop can be alienated
Fee Simple (absolute)
Duration: forever
Characteristics: Alienable, devisable, descendible
Language: “to A and his heirs” / “O to A” default
Future Interest Grantor: None
Future Interest Grantee : None
3rd Party: None
Fee Simple Determinable
Duration: If the stated condition is violated or actualized, forfeiture is automatic. Harsh!
Characteristics: Alienable, devisable, descendible
but always subject to the condition.
Language: “To A for so long as …,” or “To A during …” or “To A until …”
Future Interest Grantor: Possibility of Reverter FSDPOR-Fee Simple Determinable (Frank Sinatra Didn’t Prefer Orville Redenbacher)
Future Interest Grantee : None
3rd Party: None
Fee Simple Subject to Condition Subsequent
Duration:
1) grantor must use clear durational language and 2) grantor must explicitly carve out the right to reenter.
Characteristics:
The fee simple subject to condition subsequent endures, even in the presence of a breach of the stated condition, unless and until grantor exercises its right to re-take.
Language: “To A, but if X event occurs, grantor reserves the right to reenter and retake.”
Future Interest Grantor:
Right of entry
(Power of termination)
Future Interest Grantee : None
3rd Party: None
