Fee simple absolute: a possession of land. Ex. To A & his heirs (English Law) = To A (New Law.

Land automatically passes to heirs) Passing land gives full rights to new owner. Only exception is state rights, such as rezoning. Life Estates p. 194 1. O A for life B forever A: Life Estate B: remainder for life (sequential life estate, which is a future estate) O: reversion (back to grantor). If O is dead, Os heirs take the land. Reversion occurs when residual part of estate goes back to original owner IF the above example was in 2002 or after: B: remainder in Fee Simple Absolute *In 2002, to B forever means: to B and heirs, to B till cows come home! Heirs remain UNascertain till we die. We have no heirs till we die. 2. In 1600 O conveys Whiteacre to A for life, remainder to the heirs of B. B is alive in 1600 but soon dies without a will. Bs heir is C. Subsequently A dies. What estate does C have? O (FSA) A (LE) C (remainder FSA) If B were alive when A died: O A O then when B dies: C C here has a fee simple absolute (AKA fee simple) 3. to A and her heirs. As only child is B. Does B have an interest in Greenacre, reachable by creditors? What if A wishes to sell the land and use the proceeds. O (O.G.) A (FSA) B B has a mere expectancy here. (This would be different if A has a life estate & B had the remainder) *In 1600 A could not have alienated heirs. Heirs: people who survive decedent & are designated as intestate successors under law of descent. Intestate: dying without will. (opposite of testate). Issue: (meaning? children & children of children, etc.). Issues take at exclusion of all others. Historically, distribution of assets was done under line of succession. Until 1925, Primgeniture: oldest son inherited. If son died before dad, son of oldest son represents him. Modern rules: no concern with gender- equal share regardless of age. Under modern law, wedlock kids inherit from mother. And fathers who acknowledge them as their children. Adopted kids inherit from adoptive parents (sometimes from natural parents). Escheat is a last resort. When the land goes to the state. When person dies intestate without heirs. Ancestors: parents take as heirs if NO issue. Collaterals= All relatives Ancestors and Issues (descendants)

1. O, has two children, A daughter and B son. Subsequently B dies testate, devising all his property to W, his wife. B is survived by three children, B1 d, B2 s, B3 d. A1 s is born to A. Then O dies intestate. Who owns in 1800? Now? 1800, son of son. Now: to daughter, and the other half is split equally between sons of son. Cannot devise what you do not have before your death. 2. O conveys to A and her heirs. If A dies intestate without issue, does land escheat? No, land goes to ancestors. 3. to A for life, remainder to B and her heirs. B dies intestate without heirs. A then dies. Who owns land? B dies then A dies. A: LE B: remainder in FSA Land will escheat. *pur autre ie- a LE measured by another persons life!! Original owners have reversion. Successive owners have remainder. Alienation/ability: ability to control your property. Alienability DISfavors dead hand control. (conditions/limitations based on sale or transfer place restraints upon alienation and functional courts would find them repugnant to FS) Objections to restraints on alienation exist because they lead to: 1. Unmarketability 2. Concentration of wealth by making it impossible for the owner to sell property and use proceeds. 3. Discourage improvements on land. (because you are not likely to improve land you cannot sell, ALSO, if land cannot be sold, it cannot be mortgaged against a load to make improvements). 4. Prevent the owners creditors from reaching the property. There are 3 types of restraints: disabling (you have no power to transfer interest), forfeiture (if you transfer your interest, it will pass to somebody else), promissory (if you promise me not to transfer your interest, Ill give it to you)

Forfeiture restraints usually upheld on LE. All restraints ignored on FSA. Restraints on FSA are repugnant because courts want to promote efficiency and alienability. White v. Brown p.202: Court assumes that an estate is an FSA unless clear intent that it is less. Why? Because FSA is favored. *when a LE is sold, money is divided between LE person and person with reversion rights. Baker p.210: LE owner has a duty to take care of land. He may owe damages to future interest owners.

*No obligation to insure land. Proceeds from insurance (even when insurance was paid by LE) go to future interest owners. *Trusts permit flexibility. May be better than LE in some situations.

Woodrick p.218 Issue: whether the holder of a remainder interest in a parcel may prohibit a LT from destroying structures on the land. Court here awarded holder of remainder an injunction because courts afford some value to idiosyncratic attachments. The destruction in this case was no considered waste because it was going to eventually add to the value of the land. Waste is when the value of property is harmed. At common law, you were asked to use land as is and cannot do any harm. Modern understanding of waste: it is OK to damage property for an ultimate benefit to property. Freehold Estates: FSA, FI, and LE!! (leesholds are nonfreehold) Defeasible (will terminate upon some occurrence) Estates: 1. fee simple determinable (FSD): so long as then POR interest terminates automatically when specified condition occurs. DURATIONAL language. 2. fee simple subject to condition subsequent (FSSCS): to X, but if ., then ROE interest does not automatically terminate but may be cut short at the transferors election. CONDITIONAL language. 3. fee simple subject to executory limitation (FSSEL): present possessory interest followed by a future interest for a third party. This occurs when the owner in types 1 and 2 gives the reversion to a third party instead of himself because the interest in that third person is called an executor interest (because ROE and POR are used only when describing interest of original transferor, or of course his heirs) POR and ROE are devisable inheritable/descendible, they may also be transferred during life. (At c/l, they were UNdevisable by will or during life through inter vivos gift, but only inheritable) . At present, adverse possession can be applied to POR and ROE, where Statute of Limitations begins to run as soon as condition occurs. *Eg. to A for school purposes court unlikely to regard that condition due to disfavor of alienability. This will create a FSA. *FSA > FI > LE > TOY Estates have limitations while Trusts have estatement covenants. Covenants are promises made by grantees and are not as onerous as limitations. Breach of a limitation results in forfeiture. Breach of a covenant may result in an injunction. *Courts have considered employing a substantial compliance approach with regard to deciding whether a states requirement is a condition (POS) or a limitation (ROE). The problem is that this would result in too much litigation. A condition attached to a defeasible fee simple is usually an unenforceable- indirect restraint against alienation if it materially affects marketability adversely. Most use restrictions are enforceable unless they have the effect of affecting marketability adversely by unreasonably limiting the class of persons to whom land may be alienated (transferred). FSSCS should be viewed in light of courts disfavor of restraints on alienation. When marketability is affected, use is limited to an unreasonably small class of people, or malice, conditions are held invalid and void. At common law, holder of fee simple defeasible (meaning, FSA/FSSCS/ FSSEL) received full condemnation award if land is taken over by the government. Restatment and majority practice is that the future interest holder takes some money if the defeasible fee was ending within a reasonably short time.

p. 243 Ink case. I did not find any important information in the case. Defeasible estates that contain personal conduct restraints based on marriage violate the common law rule against restraints on marriage and are therefore not upheld by courts. When the purpose of the restraint is NOT to deter marriage but to provide for.. until marriage, it is upheld by courts. p. 251 Problems 1. conveys to A and her heirs, but if land is used for any purpose other than agricultural purposes, then O has the right to renter and take possession of the land. A: FSSCS because language is conditional O: ROE 2. Problem 1. Then some years after the conveyance, A begins construction of several residences on land. O is dead and has devised her entire estate to B. What is the state of title of the land? Because this is a FSSCS (as opposed to FSD), the land remains As until the right of re-entry is exercised. In this case it has not. Also, the ROE will belong to B if this occurred in a state that permits devise of ROE. Otherwise, Os heirs will own the ROE since the ROE is descendible in all states. FOR EXAM: ASSUME THAT ALL FUTURE INTERESTS ARE DECENDIBLE AND DEVISABLE. 3.to A and her heirs so long as land is used for residential purposes only. A: FSD O: POR 4. Problem 3. A few years after the conveyance, A starts construction of a factory on land. O is dead and devised her entire estate to B. Since B has Os POR, B is now the owner is FSA. 5. to A and her heirs on condition that if land is used for any purpose other than agricultural purposes, then to B. A: FSSEL B: EI in FSA 6. Problem 5. A few years later, A begins construction of a factory n land. B is dead and devised her entire estate to C. C: EI in FSA 7. to A and heirs. A promises, on behalf of her heirs and assigns forever, that land will be used solely for agricultural purposes. A: FSA Promise creates a covenant. 8. Problem 7. A few years later, A begins the construction of a factory on land. What remedies does O have against A? No forfeiture follows a breach of covenant. O may be able to pursue injunctive relief against A.

*POR: an interest remaining in the transferor or his heirs when a fee simply determinable is created. *ROE: occurs when the owner transfers an estate subject to condition subsequent and retains the power to cut short to terminate the estate upon the happening of that condition. Problems p. 256 1. O owns a fee simple and makes the following. (a) to A for life, then to B and her heirs A: LE B: remainder in FSA O: nothing (b) to A for life, then to B and the heirs of her body A: LE B: remainder in Fee Tail NOT ON TEST- this language is used to restrict land form going to ppl outside the the family. Hence allowing land to go only to issue. O: reversion (c) to A for life, then to B and her heirs if B attains the age of 21 before A dies. At the time of the conveyance B is 15 years old. A: LE B: contingent remainder in FSA O: reversion (d) to A for 20 years A: Term of Years O: reversion 2. to A for life, then to B for life. O subsequently dies with a will devising all of Os property to C. Then A dies and B dies. O- A- B A: LE B: LE O: reversion. Since O devised his property to C, C now owns Os reversion. Land belongs to C now. *Remainder means it becomes possessory at death. It is guaranteed. *Executory interest is based on a condition other than death. 3 different future interests in transferees: Vested Remainder: no reversion. Created in an ascertained person and is ready to possess upon death of another. There are indefeasible VR and or V subject to divestment =) Contingent Remainder: there is a reversion. Because party is unascertained OR there is a condition precedent other than the natural occurring of events such as death! Executory interest: can divest a preceding interest. It may or not become possessory, but the only way for it to become possessory is if it divests another interest

If at the time the future interest is created, if it is not possible for it to become possessory upon the termination of the prior estate, the future interest is NOT a remainder. Remainders must be capabable of becoming possessory upon termination of prior estate. Remainder tells us the kind of future interest. FSA, tells us the kind of estate held as remainder. Eg. to A for life, then to B and heirs. B here has an indefeasible Vested Remainder in FSA A remainder created in a class of persons (such as As children) is vested if one member is ascertained and there is no condition precedent. The remainder is Vested Subject to Open or Vested Subject to Partial Divestment if later-born kids are entitled to share in the gift. Heirs are people who SURVIVE a decedent and are designated as intestate successors. Prob 6. P. 261. to A for life, then to B and heirs if B survives A B: contingent remainder because there is a condition precedent. O has reversion. If A and B die at once, O takes. Prob 7. to A for life, then to B and heirs if B survives A, and if B does not survive A to C and heirs B and C have alternative contingent remainders. O: reversion *alternative CR occur when there are two LE in a row. *there is always a reversion with CR. *VR for life creates a LE and has a remainder after it! Problems p.261 1. to A for life, and in the event of As death to B and heirs. What does B have? What is B conveys her interest back to O? A: LE B: VR If B conveys to O, O will own Bs VR. 2. to A for life, then to B for life, then to C and heirs. A: LE B: LE C: VR then to C and her heirs if C survives A and B C: CR O: reversion.

3. to A and B for their joint lives, then to the survivor in fee simple A and B joint: LE Survivor: CR because we do not know who is going to survive, unascertained party. 4. to A for life, then to As children who shall reach 21. As oldest child, B, is 17. What remainders? As children: CR B: CR B subsequently reaches 21. Now it becomes, B: VRSTO. Other siblings have an EI. Prob 8. P. 261 to A for life, then to B and her heirs, but if B does not survive A to C and heirs B: VR subject to divestment C: shifting EI *Vested remainders come with another EI Contingent remainders come with another CR *there are two kinds of EI - Shifting: divest transferee - Springing: divests transferor. In the springing EI, O has a FSSEL. In the shifting, the other interest holder has a FSSEL. *If a LE ends prior to the end of a persons life, such as if there is a tortious conveyance, the land does not revert, but goes back to the future interest holder (if there is one) LE can expire prior to Life Tenants death at: 1. simultaneous deaths 2. Failure of LE through either WASTE or TRUST p.263 I do not think is important. p. 268 eg. 14 to A and heirs, but if A dies without issue surviving him, to B and her heirs. A: FSSEL because it may be divested by B if the condition stated above occurs. B: EI Eg. 15 to A for life, then to B and her heirs, but if B dies under the age of 21, to C and heirs. B is 15. B: VR STD(AKA Executory Limitation) Eg. 16 to Hartford school board, but if the premises are not used for school purposes during the next 20 years, to Town Library. Hartford: FSSEL Town: Executory interest

Eg. 17 to Hartford so long as the premises are used for school purposes, then to Town Library Hartford: FSD Town: Executory interest Problems p. 270 1. (a) to A for life, then to As children and their heirs, but if at As death he is not survived by any children, then to B and her heirs. Children: CR B: CR O: Reversion Two years after conveyance, twins, C and D, are born to A. C&D: VR subject to open As after kids: EI B: shifting EI O: nothing because there is a VR Suppose C dies during As life, and A is survived by B and D. D: gets half Cs estate/heirs: get half (b) to A for life, then to such of As children as survive him, but if none of As children survive him, to B and heirs. At the time of the conveyance, A is alive and has two children, C and D. A: LE C and D: CR B: CR O: reversion (c) to A for life, then to B and her heirs, but if A is survived at this death by any children, then to such surviving children and their heirs. A the time of the conveyance, A is alive and has two children, C and D. A: LE B: VR in FSSEL (condition subsequent) As surviving kids: shifting EI 2. T devises 10,000 to my cousin, Don, if and when he survives his wife. Don: EI Ts heirs: FSSEL {devise: FSA} Conveyance: FSSEL p. 271 *conditions precedent create CR. Conditions subsequent create VT. (subsequent: vested. Also EI. But if then )

p. 271 1. O conveys to A for life, then to B for life, then to Cs heirs. A, B, C, and O are alive at the time. C is unmarried and has two living children. A: LE B: Vested remainder for life Cs heirs: CR O: reversion 2.to A for upon her first wedding anniversary. A is alive and unmarried. O is also alive. A: springing EI O: FSSEL 3. to A for 10 years, then to such of As children as attain age 21. A and O are alive. A has two children, X-20, and Y-17. A: TOY A and O: VR STO because we do not have any ascertained party. It is a CR O: reversion 4. Same as 3. Assume X attains 21, and Y is still under 21. A and O are alive. Interest has vested in X and is STO Y: shifting EI 5. Same as 3. X dies at 22 and Y is 19. O is alive. No reversion. Interest goes to Xs heirs. Y: shifting EI 6. to A for life, then to As children. A and O are alive. A has one child, X. X: VR STO in FSA O: no reversion As other kids: shifting EI 7. Same as 6. Assume A has another child, Y, and then A dies survived by X, Y, and O. A dies. X, and Y have VR in FSA. Indefeasibly Vested. 8. to A for life, then to B and her heirs; but if B marries Z, then to C his heirs. B: VR subject to complete divestment (FSSEL) C: shifting EI 9. to A for life, then to B and her heirs so long as land is organically farmed. B: VR (FSD) O: POR 10. to A if she graduates from college. A is not yet enrolled in college. A: springing EI O: FSSEL (Executory limitation = EI) VR STO is a class gift (not a fully defined group) VR STPartial Divestment is NOT a class gift where the group is not defined.

I did not cover pages 272 and 273 because I do not think they are important. Trusts RAP Creates a specified period of dead hand control for matriarch/patriarch but not perpetual To strike a balance between limitless control of land after death and zero control No interest is good unless it must vest, if at all, no later than 21 years after some life in being at the creation of the interest Applies only to interests NOT vested at the time the conveyance is created. Hence, it applies to: 1. CR 2. VR STO (this interest is not considered vested under RAP) 3. EI 4. Class gifts Trustee holds legal title to the trust property and manages property for the benefit of the beneficiaries, who have the right of beneficial enjoyment of the property. Trustee is a fiduciary Trustee has the power to sell assets and reinvest the proceeds. Trusts create two interests: LE and future interest Spendthrift trusts: trusts can be drafted in a way where trust beneficiaries have no power to transfer or borrow against their trust and creditors have no power to reach those interests to satisfy debts. Corpus of trust cannot be reached by trust beneficiary; only the product of it can be reached.

HOW TO? 1. Determine interest. Determine if RAP applies, (CR, VR STO, EI, Class gift) 2. Determine whether interest might not vest within the perpetuity period of lives in being. This means within 21 years. You need only one measuring/validating life. *you can search for a validating life even if its not mentioned in the instrument. The key is that it must be the life of someone who can affect the vesting or termination of the interest. 3. Strike out void interests. p. 286 Example 29. in trust to A for life, then to As first child to reach 21. In this case, A is the validating life. Since we can prove that any child of A who reaches 21 will reach 21 within 21 years of As death, remainder is valid. The remainder cannot possibly vest more than 21 years after As death, so it is valid. Ex 30. in trust for A for life, then to As first child to reach 25. A has no child age 25 or older. The contingent remainder here is void because you cannot prove that As first child to reach 25 will do so within 21 years of As death. Ex 31. to my grandchildren who reach 21. T leaves two children and 3 grandchildren under 21. The validating life is the survivor of Ts two children. All Ts grandchildren must reach 21, if at all, within years after the death of the survivor of Ts children. GIFT IS VALID.

Ex 32. T devises in trust for A for life, then to As children for the life of the survivor of them, then upon the death of the last surviving child of A, to As grandchildren. At the time of Ts death, A is an 80yr old woman with two living children, B and C. A(LE) As children for the life of the survivor upon death of last child grandchildren The interest in the grandchildren is void because A might have another child, X, who could also have a child, Y, conceived and born more than 21 years after the death of the survivor of A,B, and C. *we need a life in being (an ascertained life) that within 21 years of the end of it we will know whether interest will vest or not. Persons either named in the problem or specifically implied (must be a closed group of people) Gifts to classes under the RAP are all-or-nothing. This means that if the gift in one member might vest too remotely then the whole class gift is void. A class gift under the RAP does not vest in any member until the interests of all the members have vested. Usually if there are two open classes, the interest will be void under RAP. The rule of convenience may save class gift interests. This rule cuts off the possibility of new entrants to a class at the earlier of two times: (1) The natural, or physiological closing of the class. That is when the possibility of births or adoption ends. (2) The premature or artificial closing of the class through the operation of the rule of convenience. on the distribution date if a beneficiary of the class gift is then entitled to distribution. *devises happen upon death while conveyances can happen when you are alive. Problems page 289 and 290 1. to A for life, then to B if B attains age of 30. B is now 2 years old. A: LE B: CR The interest is valid because within 21 years of Bs death we will know whether he attained 30 or not! 2. to A for life, then to As children for their lives, then to B is B is then alive, and if B is not the alive, to Bs heirs. A: LE As children: CR for life (because it follows a LE, it is a remainder, it is C because we do not know who the kids are) B: CR Bs heirs: CR O: reversion Which of these are not subject to RAP? Reversion and As LE As kids: VALID because you will know whether this interest will vest or not within 21 years of As death B: VALID because interest will vest or fail when As last child dies or B dies Bs heirs: VALID because at Bs death we will know whether the interest will vest in B or his heirs (we cannot use As kids as measuring kids because we need a life in being at the conveyance)

3. O, a teacher of property law, declares that she holds in trust 1000 for all members of my present property class who are admitted to the bar. Is the gift good? Yes. Because we will know within 21 years of the last class members death, whether he was admitted or not and the class we are talking about is closed. Suppose O had said for the first child of A who is admitted to the bar. first child to pass the bar: EI (because it will come back and divest O. CR happen when they automatically follows a LE or TOY) We use A as a validating life: this VOIDS the interest. We strike it and this results in the interest being struck. 4. O conveys to A for life, then to As children who reach 25. A has a child, B, age 26, living at the time of the conveyance. Is the remainder valid? A: LE [B: VR STO As afterborn kids: EI] BOTH of these are called class gifts when we are doing RAP A fails as a validating life because we will not know at As death whether the child turned 25 or not within 21 years. We will VOID the class gift, so all we have is a LE and there is a reversion. 5. O conveys to A for life, then to As widow, if any, for life, then to As issue then living. Is the gift to As issue valid? A: LE Widow: CR for life Issue then living: CR O: reversion Which are subject to RAP? As widow: VALID INTEREST because we will know within 21 years of As death whether his widow will take. As issue then living: VOID because we will not know within 21 years of As death whether As issue will outlive As widow. We cannot use As widow as the validating life because right now we do not know who As widow will be. 6. T devises to A for life, and on As death to As death to As children for their lives, and upon the death of A and As children, to {the person or persons indicated in the brackets}. A: LE As children: CR for life A and B survive T. A has one child, X, who also survives T. Is the devise of the remainder in a fee simple valid or void under the RAP if the following words are inserted? (a) B if A dies childless. VALID (b) B if A has no grandchildren then living. VOID (c) Bs children OK (d) Bs children then living. VOID (e) As grandchildren. VOID (f) Ts grandchildren. The grandkids are the validating lives Focus on when all the class members will be ascertained (within 21 years?) and on when all the conditions precedent will be met for all the members (within 21 years?).

Revision! FSA is largest. Possessory interest and long term future use in one owner. FSA is conveyable, descendible, devisable, creditors can reach it, whole bundle of rights. FSA remains subject to local law. Heirs: survive decedent are ascertained at death. At common law spouse was not heir and was only dower. Fee tail not on exam. LE: a conveyance in land, operative during a measuring life. LE is always followed by either reversion or remainder. Restraints and alienation are matters we do not like. IMP Waste: IMP FSD: ends automatically when a stated event happens. Defined by a durational language. Such as: so long as, until no longer, during the use of. Poofes of out existence at the moment that durational lang is violated possibility of a reverter becomes operative FSSCS: doesnt automatically terminate but may be cut short or divested ROE. Conditional language: but if.. provided that when.. may be express lang or implied if words are reasonably susceptible. Condition subsequent. I dont know is an answer you can choose if language is conflicting. Learn laws of 1600. Prima genitor. FSA>FT>LE>TOY LE expires with life. Reversions dont expire with life. You can only convey what you have.

RULE AGAINST P -

5 RAP 25 on other interests A class gift can be called a VRSTO or a class gift. Class gifts are subject to RAP EI subject to RAP Only one problem with implied validating life. Valid, void, not subject to RAP. Or do 3 and show what happens if you strike it.