Ownership Flashcards
Who has proper title if (1) man conveys building to church “for purpose of using building to further religious education,” (2) man dies 6Y later and niece is sole heir, (3) will devises entire estate to friend, (4) church never use building, gives to investor for valuable consideration?
The investor - “for purpose” is precatory and doesn’t create a defeasible condition like “so long as” - since church had proper fee simple, it could convey to the investor legally; the building was no longer part of the man’s estate when he died
Who owns a property if (1) 3 sons get property from dead dad as joint tenants, (2) youngest son sells interest to oldest son, (3) oldest son dies and gives all interests to daughter, (4) youngest son dies, (5) after youngest son dies, middle son gives his interest to nephew?
Daughter 1/3 and nephew 2/3 tenants in common - (1) when youngest son sold to oldest son = oldest son + middle son 1/3 1/3 JT, oldest son 1/3 TiC, (2) oldest son dies = daughter gets 1/3 TiC, middle son gets right of survivorship so 2/3 TiC, (3) middle son has 2/3 that was given to nephew
Who wins in a quiet title action if (1) Maude Flanders devised her building to the church “for so long as it is used for religious purposes, (2) rest of property interests devised to Ned, (3) after 10Y, church stopped using the building for religious purposes, (4) gave for valuable consideration a quitclaim deed to Mr. Burns, who plans to convert building to commercial use, (5) Rod and Todd are Maude’s only heirs?
Ned Flanders - Maude devised a fee simple determinable, which automatically resulted in a possibility of reverter when the church stopped using her building for religious purposes - since all of her remaining property interests were devised to Ned, including the possiblity of reverter future interest in this building, Ned would be the one who the building would revert back to as soon as the church stopped using it for religious purposes; Mr. Burns had only a quitclaim deed, and the church no longer had any legal title by the time he purchased the building
Who has interest in a beach house if (1) Butterscotch and Beatrice owned it as joint tenants, (2) Butterscotch’s mistress, Hollyhock’s mother, loved the beach house and did not want Beatrice to have rights to it, (3) Butterscotch sold his half to Hollyhock’s mother without telling Beatrice, (4) after a week, Hollyhock’s mother sold the house back to Butterscotch, (5) Butterscotch died and devised his entire estate to Corbin Creamerman?
Corbin and Beatrice each one 1/2 interest as TIC - Butterscotch essentially severed the JT when he sold the house to Hollyhock’s mother and destroyed right of survivorship, turning it into TIC and when Hollyhock’s mother sold it back to Butterscotch, he and Beatrice each owned 1/2 as TIC - when Butterscotch died, he devised only his 1/2 to Corbin, while Beatrice held the other 1/2 as TIC
Will Lisa prevail if she sues Homer for 2Y worth of property taxes if (1) Marge died and devised home to Homer for life, remainder to Lisa, (2) will didn’t specify duties w/ regard to maintenance and expenses b/w Homer and Lisa, (3) Homer took possession but didn’t live in the property or rent it out, but rental value was substantial, (4) Homer didn’t pay any taxes, (5) finally Lisa decided to pay and sue Homer for reimbursement?
Yes - since Marge’s will didn’t specify who pays taxes, it’s Homer’s responsibility as the life tenant to pay all property taxes during the course of the life estate - Homer would’ve only been responsible however, for taxes up to the value of rental income, but since it was substantial in this case, it was unlikely that this limitation applied - however since Lisa did end up paying for Homer, he owes her for reimbursement
Can Lisa and Nelson evict Ralph and declare his lease void if (1) -7Y Bart, Lisa, and Nelson all were JT of a house, (2) Bart lived in the house alone while Nelson and Lisa lived out of state, (3) -1Y, Bart moved out and rented the house to Ralph and they both signed a written lease, (4) Ralph has never missed rent to Bart, (5) recently, Lisa and Nelson learned about the rental and want to evict Ralph?
No, Ralph’s lease is valid and can’t be evicted but must share possession with Lisa and Nelson - Bart can only transfer his portion of the interest in a lease, so since Bart would have been obligated to share possession with Lisa and Nelson, so would Ralph, and Bart must share rental income proportionally with Lisa and Nelson
Does Lisa owe Bart rent and profits from her sale of wool if (1) Lisa got 1/3 and Bart got 2/3 of property as TIC, (2) Bart lives out of state and doesn’t try to use the land, (3) Lisa uses the land to graze sheep and commercialize their wool?
No - Lisa as a TIC co-tenant is generally not required to pay rent or share profits from use of the property
Why is Maggie entitled to damages from Bart if (1) Homer and Marge gave Bart a life estate with a remainder to Maggie, (2) Bart rented the property to a friend for FMV, which was well in excess of mortgage, over the objection of Maggie, (3) Bart refused to pay the mortgage principal and insisted on paying interest only, (4) Bart refused to insure the property, (5) he also cut down all the trees on the property
Bart cut down trees on the property - as a holder of an interest other than fee simple, Bart is limited by doctrine of waste - it would be affirmative waste for Bart to actively cut down trees, allowing Maggie to bring suit - however, he is not liable for not paying the mortgage b/c life tenants are only required to pay interest - he had no obligation to insure the property and has the right ot lease, sell or mortgage his interest
Can Homer win in a quiet title action against Luanne in Washington state court if (1) Kirk and Luanne were domiciled and divorced in Oregon, (2) the court ordered Kirk to give Luanne his land in Washington state, (3) after conveying land to Luanne, Kirk deeded Homer the land for FMV, (4) Homer was domiciled in Washington state and aware of the conveyance to Luanne, (5) Homer recorded the deed before Luanne, (6) Oregon is race-notice, Washington state is race only?
Homer will win b/c the land is located in Washington state and under conflicts of laws, law of Washington state will prevail b/c the land is in Washington state - therefore, it is race only, meaning Homer prevails over Luanne b/c he recorded first, despite having notice of the conveyance to Luanne
Can Lisa transfer her executory interest subject to Bart dying with only a spouse and no children during her lifetime?
Yes - while not permitted during common law, this is permitted today
Can either Lisa or Maggie reclaim their interest in the land if (1) Bart, Lisa and Maggie inherited land as equal TIC, (2) land has mortgage w/ acceleration clause making entire balance due on default, (3) all three siblings defaulted, (4) bank foreclosed on mortgage, (5) at foreclosure, Bart bought the land by paying 45% of FMV?
Yes if either Lisa or Maggie pays 1/3 amount Bart paid to redeem the land - as TIC’s, neither Bart, Lisa, or Maggie owe fiduciary obligations on each other but since they got it all in a gift, there can be fiduciary obligations - in this case, Lisa and Maggie both have right to repurchase their original interest by paying Bart their due contributions in reasonable time - Bart can be compelled to sell Lisa and Maggie back their interests if they offer contribution to Bart within a reasonable time - in the absence of this fiduciary duty among related TIC’s, there would not be a duty for the redeemer to allow the other TICs to repurchase
