RAP

Question 1

O conveys “To A for life, then to B if B attains the age of 30.” B is 2 years good. Is the interest to B good under the common law rule against perpetuities?

Answer 1

1) Created upon death = immediate
2) A = LE, B = CR, O = reversion
3) B is alive and B counts as a measuring life
4) If we Kill B right now, he’s 2 years old and it is certain he will not reach 30 years old in 21 years + 10 months

B’s interest is still good because he fails for CERTAIN

Question 2

What is the difference between deed, devising, and conveyance?

Answer 2

Conveyance/Deed = still alive
Devise = upon death

Question 3

O conveys: “To A for life, then to A’s children for their lives, then to B if B is then alive, and if B is not then alive, to B’s heirs” A → No children

Are the interests to B and B’s heirs good under the common law rule against perpetuities?

Answer 3

A = LE, A’s children = LE in CR (unascertained), B = Alt. CR in FSA, B’s heirs = alt. CR in FSA, O = technical reversion (due to alt contingent remainders) –> we apply RAP b/c of CR’s

A is alive, B is alive = B is a measuring life if we are looking at B’s heirs future interest

If we killed B today, his heirs would for certain have rights to the property as their alternate contingent remainder

B’s heirs’s interest is valid under RAP because either way, for certain either B or B’s heirs will get the land (alt contingent remainders)

Question 4

What is the 4.5 step process created by Cai?

Answer 4

1. Notice when and how future interest is created
2. Who’s alive? Label the estate and future interest
3. Find one validating/measuring life
4. Do the math: will interest vest or fail for certain in 21 years + 10 months?
   .5 = Void any language that violates RAP

Question 5

To which interests does RAP apply?

Answer 5

Contingent Remainders
Executory Interests
Class Gifts: VRSO

Question 6

What is the traditional definition of RAP?

Answer 6

“No interest is good unless it must vest, if at all, no later than twenty-one years after some life in being at the creation of the interest”

Question 7

Notice When Future Interest is Created = that’s when the period starts!

Answer 7

By will = at death of testator/testatrix
By trust = whenever the trust becomes irrevocable
By inter vivos = whenever transfer/conveyance is granted

Question 8

What are the only vested remainders subject to RAP?

Answer 8

VRSO (class of persons)
“3 Musketeers rule” - all for one, one for all
Requires class is closed, all conditions have been satisfied by every member of the class

Question 9

What values does RAP forward?

Answer 9

Anti-fairness

Pro-certainty

Question 10

O conveys: A for life, then to B and her heirs, but if B ever sells alcohol on the premises then to C and her heirs

Move through Cai’s 4.5 step process to label the lives, interests and which (if any) future interests require a RAP analysis

Answer 10

1. Convey = inter vivos
2. A = LE, B = VRSD, C = EI
3. B is the ONLY one who has an effect on whether or not alcohol is sold on the premises
   Why B? Even though B’s interest is not subject to RAP, B can serve as the measuring life on E’s EI
   Why not C? C cannot directly affect the vesting of the future interest
4. Can we show with absolute certainty that alcohol will be sold or never? YES, either there will be alcohol sold during B’s lifetime and he loses to C. OR B will not ever sell alcohol on the premises and E never gets the property. RAP does not apply, interest is valid.

Question 11

O conveys: A for life, then to B and her heirs, but if alcohol is sold on the premises, then to C and her heirs

Move through Cai’s 4.5 step process to label the lives, interests and which (if any) future interests require a RAP analysis

Answer 11

1) Convey = inter vivos
2) A = LE, B = VRSD, C = EI
3) RAP applies because there is no measuring life, skip to 4.5) C’s EI is not valid

“A for life, then to B and her heirs” B now has a VR in FSA

Question 12

Testator, T, devises property, “To my oldest descendant alive at my son, Tom’s death.”

Move through Cai’s 4.5 step process to label the lives, interests and which (if any) future interests require a RAP analysis

Answer 12

1. Devise = death
2. Tom =nothing , Oldest descendant who survives Tom = CR (unascertained and condition precedent) –> RAP Applies
3. Tom is the validating life because he directly impacts when he dies
4. Kill tom = will the CR vest or fail within 21 years and 10 months? YES!

Interest is valid under RAP

Question 13

Testator, T, devises property, “To my oldest descendant alive at the death of the last to die of all of my issue who are alive at my death.” Who can be the measuring life?

Answer 13

1. Devise = death. Who is alive @ creation: not T (T devised), some of his issue
2. FI in oldest descendant alive = CR (unascertained). Class gift and the class is closed bc of the key language: all issue alive at my death.
3. VL = closed class of issues alive @ T’s death
4. Kill VL. Will the CR vest or fail within 21 years and 10 months? Yes. At the last issue’s death the FI will vest or fail.

Interest is valid under RAP

Question 14

O grants property, “To such of my children who graduate from college.” At the time of the grant, O’s has 3 children alive, 6, 10, and 19. The 19 year old is in college.

Answer 14

1. Grant = O is alive, O’s three kids
2. Children who graduate from college = CR in a class gift. Class is open. RAP analysis applies
3. VL = O cannot be even though alive bc O has no control / causal relation to the kids graduating from college, Kids cannot bc even though alive they are an open class. Fails under RAP due to lack of VL!
   a. Strike the entire interest, reverts back to O

Question 15

O devises property, “To such of my children who graduate from college.” O’s leaves behind three children alive, ages 6, 10, and 19, respectively. The 19 year old is currently in college, but has yet to graduate.

Answer 15

1. Devise = O is dead, O’s 3 kids are alive
2. CR = class is closed, but the three alive children have a condition precedent, RAP analysis
3. VL = all of O’s 3 kids can be their own validating life because the class is closed! VL can be the last one to die
4. Kill each kid. We will we know if the CR will vest or fail within 21 yrs and 10 mos? Yes. At each kid’s death, w/in the closed group, we will know if they graduated from college or not.

Valid interest under RAP

Question 16

T devises property, “To my daughter, Dara for life, then to such of Dara’s children to reach 21.”

Answer 16

1. Devise = T is dead, Dara is alive
2. Dara = LE, Dara’s unborn children = CR (unascertained, condition precedent), requires RAP analysis
3. VL = Dara because she’s casually related to whether or not she has children (not if they survive)
4. Kill Dara. Will we know if the CR will vest or fail within 21 yrs and 10 mos? Yes.

Interest is valid under RAP

Question 17

T devises property, “To my son, David for life, then to such of my grandchildren to reach 21.” T is survived by David, Dara, and Danny, all of whom are T’s children.”

Answer 17

1. T = devises/dead, David/Danny/Dara = 3 kids
2. David = LE, Grandchildren to reach 21 = CR.
3. VL = David, Dara, and Danny; all of T’s children. Why? They are alive and causally related to the vesting bc they determine who T’s grandchildren are.
4. Kill David, Dara, and Danny (or kill the last of them who is alive). Will we know if the CR will vest or fail within 21 yrs and 10 mos? Yes. At each death we will know who David, Dara, and Danny’s kids are.

Therefore the grandkids will be known and FI will have vested

Question 18

Question: T devises property to “A for life, and on A’s death to A’s children for their lives, and upon the death of A and A’s children, to B if A has no grandchildren then living” A and B survive T. Under the Common Law Rule against Perpetuities, is the interest in B good?

Answer 18

No, because A may have children born after the creation of the interest AND because the interest may vest or fail more than 21 years after the death of A and B.

A = LE
A’s children = SLE
A’s grandchildren = CR in Fee simple
B = EI shifting

A and B are alive

A = VL for A’s children’s SLE
NO VL for A’s grandchildren = Invalid under RAP

“Then living” = CR in B’s children are subject to a condition precedent where the children have to be alive at this point in time. The moment that successive life estate ends, we need to know which children (if any) alive. Cai: “this snaps the causal nexus”

This interest is void under RAP because it can NOT vest until after the death of A’s last child. Only the death of this longest-lived child of A can impact whether or not there will be grandchildren of A THEN living. A could have children born after the moment the interest is created, which is at T’s death.

Question 19

T devises property to “A for life, and on A’s death to A’s children for their lives, and upon the death of A and A’s children, to B’s children then living.” A and B survive T. Under the Common Law Rule against Perpetuities, is the interest in B’s children good?

Answer 19

A = LE, A’s kids = SLE, B’s kids = CR in Fee Simple

No because, because A may have children born after the creation of the interest AND because the interest may vest or fail more than 21 years after the death of A and B.

Question 20

T devises property to “A for life, and on A’s death to A’s children for their lives, and upon the death of A and A’s children, to A’s grandchildren.” A survives T. Under the Common Law Rule against Perpetuities, is the interest in A’s grandchildren good?

Answer 20

A = LE, A’s kids = SLE, A’s grandkids = CR in FSA

No because, because A may have children born after the creation of the interest AND because the interest may vest or fail more than 21 years after the death of A.

Question 21

O conveys Blackacre “to A for life, then to A’s children who reach 25.” Under the horrible Common Law Rule against Perpetuities, is the conveyance to A’s children good?

Answer 21

No, because it might vest more than 21 years after A’s death.

Yes! This creates a life estate in A followed by a contingent remainder in a class (A’s children who reach 25.) (Note that IF a child of A had already been born, the class would be still be open because A could have more children). It is a contingent remainder because of the condition precedent of reaching 25. It is an open class because A is still alive and could have more children. A is the only possible measuring life here. However, the contingent remainder is void under RAP because A could have a child right before A dies and that child may not reach 25 until more than 21 years after A’s death. Because of this possibility of the late-born or after-born child, the gift fails. Recall the special rule about class gifts - they vest or fail together.

Question 22

O conveys Blackacre “to A for life, then to A’s children who reach 25.” Under the terrible Common Law Rule against Perpetuities, is the conveyance to A’s children good if A has a child, B, who is 26 years old?

Answer 22

No, because the gift to A’s children is a class gift and might vest too remotely in some child other than B.

Question 23

O conveys “to A for life, then to A’s widow, if any, for life, then to A’s issue then living.” Under the Common Law Rule against Perpetuities is the conveyance to A’s issue good?

Answer 23

No, because A cannot be the measuring life because the interest in A’s children will only vest on the death of A’s widow AND A’s widow cannot be the measuring life because she might be born after the creation of the interest.

Question 24

T devises property to “A for life, and on A’s death to A’s children for their lives, and upon the death of A and A’s children, to B if A dies childless.” A and B survive T. Under the Common Law Rule against Perpetuities, is the interest in A’s children good?

Answer 24

Yes, because the interest will vest or fail at or before the death of A.

A works as a measuring life here for the interest in A’s children, which is either a contingent remainder (if no children are yet born) or a vested remainder subject to open (if some are born). At the moment A dies, you will know if A had kids still alive at that moment.

Question 25

T devises property to “A for life, and on A’s death to A’s children for their lives, and upon the death of A and A’s children, to B if A dies childless.” A and B survive T. Under the Common Law Rule against Perpetuities, is the interest in B good?

Answer 25

Yes, because the interest will vest or fail at or before the death of A.

A is a valid measuring life because at the moment of A’s death, you will know with absolute certainty if A had children or not. At that moment, B’s interest will vest (if A died childless) or fail (if A left behind children). Note: B can not be a measuring life because B has no relationship to A’s fecundity/sterility/inclination for children.

Question 26

T devises property, “To A for life, and on A’s death to A’s children for their lives, and upon the death of A and A’s children to B’s children then living”

A and B survive T. A has one child X who also survives T. Is the devise to B’s children then living valid under RAP?

Answer 26

1) Devised = T is dead, possession is immediate
2) A = LE, X and A’s other children = SLE, B’s children alive after A and A’s children are dead = CR in FSA

The CR is subject to RAP analysis

3) VL = B is casually related to her children’s birth/existence
4) Kill A and A’s children. Does the interest fail or succeed with certainty within 21 years and 10 months? Yes - either the kids are alive or they are dead. We’ll know for sure either way.

Question 27

O to A for life, then to B and her heirs if B breeds dogs during A’s lifetime, and if B doesn’t breed dogs during A’s lifetime, then to C.

Answer 27

• A has LE
• B has alt. CR
Contingent because condition precedent

• C has Alt. CR
• Technical reversion even though it will never become possessory

• RAP analysis:
o Good under RAP because A is validating life. At A’s death we will know if B bred the dogs or not with certainty.

Question 28

O to A for life, then to B and her heirs, but if B doesn’t breed dogs during A’s lifetime, then to C.

Answer 28

• A has LE
• B has VRSD
• C has EI

Now, just the EI is vulnerable to RAP
o Good under RAP because A is validating life and we will know at A’s death whether or not B bred the dogs.

Question 29

O to A for life, then to B after she writes A’s obituary.

Answer 29

o A has LE
o B has springing EI
o O has reversion subject to EI
o RAP Analysis: B’s interest is vulnerable to RAP, but it’s good under RAP because B can be its own measuring life. At B’s death we will know with certainty of they wrote A’s obit or not.

Question 30

O conveys Blackacre to A for life, then to A’s children. A has 1 child, B. B dies before A. Who gets Blackacre when A dies if A has no other children?

Answer 30

o A has LE
o B: VRSO
o B’s heirs gets VRSO because no reversion. If A has more kids they share it with them
o VRSO Vulnerable to RAP: A can be measuring life so it’s valid

Question 31

O devises Blackacre A for life, then to whoever is the groundskeeper of Blackacre.

Answer 31

A: LE
Groundskeeper: CR (unascertained)
O: Reversion

RAP analysis for CR: this fails because we don’t know for certain whether or not at A’s death there will be a groundskeeper, or for one 21 years and 10 months after A’s death.

Strike the CR to the groundskeeper and A gets the property in FSA

Question 32

O grants to A for life, then to my children who finish med school. O has two children, Bianca and Catherine. Bianca is in her first year of med school and Catherine is in her third year of med school.

Answer 32

A: LE
Children who finish med school: CR (condition to meet) in a class gift
O: Reversion
RAP analysis: This fails under RAP because B and C cannot be their own validating lives while O is still alive. A cannot be the validating life because she does not directly impact whether or not any of her children finish med school. A could also have more children. A gets the interest in FSA.