Upload
turner
View
32
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
DEFEASIBLE FEES. DEFEASIBLE FEES Restatement Terms. FEE SIMPLE DETERMINABLE (to grantor; automatic) F.S. ON CONDITION SUBSEQUENT (to grantor; must act) F.S. ON EXECUTORY LIMITATION (any to grantee). IDENTIFYING DEFEASIBLE FEES. IDENTIFYING DEFEASIBLE FEES. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
DEFEASIBLE FEES
DEFEASIBLE FEESRestatement Terms
•FEE SIMPLE DETERMINABLE (to grantor; automatic)
•F.S. ON CONDITION SUBSEQUENT (to grantor; must act)
•F.S. ON EXECUTORY LIMITATION (any to grantee)
IDENTIFYING DEFEASIBLE FEES
W ho Holds Future Interest?G rantor (or unnam ed) or 2d G rantee
IDENTIFYING DEFEASIBLE FEES
If G rantor (or unnam ed):H ow does it operate?
Self-Executing or G rantor M ust Act
If 2d G rantee:Fee S im ple on Executory L im ita tion
(p lus Executory In terest)
W ho Holds Future Interest?G rantor (or unnam ed) or 2d G rantee
IDENTIFYING DEFEASIBLE FEES
If Self-Executing:Fee S im ple D eterm inab le
(p lus Possib ility o f R everter)
If Grantor M ust Act:Fee S im ple on C ond ition Subsequent
(p lus R ight o f Entry)
If Grantor (or unnam ed):H ow does it opera te?
Self-Executing or G rantor M ust Act
If 2d G rantee:Fee S im ple on Executory L im ita tion
(p lus Executory In terest)
W ho Holds Future Interest?G rantor (or unnam ed) or 2d G rantee
Warning: Inconsistency
• Textbook says Fee Simple on Executory Limitation terminates automatically (P580)
• For our purposes, assume that sometimes, a Fee Simple on Executory Limitation can operate like a Fee Simple on Condition Subsequent
• “To Sonny & his heirs, but if Sonny ever runs for Congress, Cher & her heirs may enter and take the land.”
DEFEASIBLE FEES
v. CONTINGENT REMAINDERS
DEFEASIBLE FEES
• PRESENT INTEREST IS FEE
CONTINGENTREMAINDERS
• PRESENT INTEREST IS FINITE
DEFEASIBLE FEES
• PRESENT INTEREST IS FEE
• PRESENT ESTATE CUT OFF IF CONDITION MET
CONTINGENTREMAINDERS
• PRESENT INTEREST IS FINITE
• PRESENT ESTATE TERMINATES NATURALLY
DEFEASIBLE FEES
• PRESENT INTEREST IS FEE
• PRESENT ESTATE CUT OFF IF CONDITION MET
• FUTURE INTEREST IN EITHER GRANTOR OR GRANTEE
CONTINGENTREMAINDERS
• PRESENT INTEREST IS FINITE
• PRESENT ESTATE TERMINATES NATURALLY
• REMAINDER IN GRANTEE PLUS REVERSION IN GRANTOR
Pepe grants Tealacre to Rory and his heirs, but if Totie loses 100 pounds, she may enter and retake the land.(Fee Simple on Executory Limitation +
Executory Interest)
Pepe grants Tealacre to Rory for life, then to Totie if she loses 100
pounds.
(Life Estate + Contingent Remainder)
Back to the Beatles:
(H): Thelma conveys "to Louise for 99 years if Louise so long live."
Louise?
(H): Thelma conveys "to Louise for 99 years if Louise so long live."
Louise: Term of years determinable.
What other interests are there?
(H): Thelma conveys "to Louise for 99 years if Louise so long live."
Louise: Term of years determinable.
Thelma: Possibility of Reverter +
Reversion =
Reversion (Merger)
DOCTRINE OF MERGER
If one person becomes the owner of two contiguous interests, the
interests will “merge”
DOCTRINE OF MERGER
If one person becomes the owner of two contiguous interests, the interests will
merge.
Example: Eric has a life estate. Vanessa holds the reversion that follows it. If Eric purchases the reversion from Vanessa, it merges with his life estate and he will have a fee simple absolute.
DOCTRINE OF MERGERIf one person becomes the owner of two
contiguous interests, the interests will merge.
Example: Eric has a life estate. Vanessa holds the reversion that follows it. If Eric purchases the reversion from Vanessa, it merges with his life estate and he will have a fee simple absolute.
Mahrenholz v. County Board
DQs E5-E8 Eagles
IGNORE THE JACQMAINS
1. Delete last paragraph on P581.
2. Delete last complete paragraph on P582.
3. Pretend you never heard of the Jacqmains.
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS
• 3/51: Grant to SD#1
• 2/69: Mrs.H dies intestate; HH sole heir
• 5/73: Property used for storage only
• 5/77: HH conveys interest to Ms
• 9/77: HH releases interest to SD#1
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSD +PR
• 3/51: Grant to SD#1: SD-FSD Hs-PR
• 2/69: Mrs.H dies intestate; HH sole heir?
• 5/73: Property used for storage only
• 5/77: HH conveys interest to Ms
• 9/77: HH releases interest to SD#1
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSD +PR
• 3/51: SD-FSD Hs-PR
• 2/69: Mrs.H dies intestate; HH sole heir SD-FSD HH-PR
• 5/73: Property used for storage only?(2 Possibilities: Violation or Not)
• 5/77: HH conveys interest to Ms
• 9/77: HH releases interest to SD#1
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSD +PR
2/69: SD-FSD HH-PR
GRANT VIOLATED
HH-FEE SIMPLE ABSOLUTE
5/77 HH --> Ms?
NO VIOLATION
SD-FSD HH-PR
5/77 HH --> Ms?
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSD +PR
GRANT VIOLATED
HH-FS ABSOLUTE
5/77 HH --> Ms?
Ms-FS Absolute
9/77 HH release to SD?
NO VIOLATION
SD-FSD HH-PR5/77 HH --> Ms?
SD-FSD HH-PR
9/77 HH release to SD?
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSD +PR
GRANT VIOLATED
Ms-FS Absolute
9/77 HH release to SD?
Ms - FS Absolute
NO VIOLATION
SD-FSD HH-PR
9/77 HH release to SD?
SD - FS Absolute
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSCS +RE
• 3/51: Grant to SD#1: SD-FSCS Hs-RE
• 2/69: Mrs.H dies intestate; HH sole heir?
• 5/73: Property used for storage only
• 5/77: HH conveys interest to Ms
• 9/77: HH releases interest to SD#1
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSCS +RE
• 3/51: SD-FSCS Hs-RE
• 2/69: Mrs.H dies intestate; HH sole heir SD-FSCS HH-RE
• 5/73: Property used for storage only?(2 Possibilities: Violation or Not)
• 5/77: HH conveys interest to Ms
• 9/77: HH releases interest to SD#1
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSCS +RE
2/69: SD-FSCS HH-RE
GRANT VIOLATED
SD-FSCS HH-RE
5/77 HH --> Ms?
NO VIOLATION
SD-FSCS HH-RE
5/77 HH --> Ms?
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSCS +RE
GRANT VIOLATED
SD-FSCS HH-RE
5/77 HH --> Ms?
SD-FSCS HH-RE
9/77 HH release to SD?
NO VIOLATION
SD-FSCS HH-RE 5/77 HH --> Ms?
SD-FSCS HH-RE
9/77 HH release to SD?
Mahrenholz v. County Board MAJOR EVENTS: FSCS +RE
GRANT VIOLATED
SD-FSCS HH-RE
9/77 HH release to SD?
SD - FS Absolute
NO VIOLATION
SD-FSCS HH-RE
9/77 HH release to SD?
SD - FS Absolute
Mahrenholz: Summary of Possibilities
FSD/PR FSCS/RE
Violation Mahrenholzes School District
No Violation School District School District
Mahrenholz v. County Board
The court says (P583) : “The type of interest held governs
the mode of reinvestment with title if reinvestment is to occur.”
DQE6. What does the court mean by
“reinvestment” ?
DQE7: (P584) “In Northwestern Univ. …, a conveyance was ‘made upon the express condition that said Wesley Hospital… shall erect a hospital building on said lot … and that on the failure of said Wesley Hospital to carry out these conditions the title shall revert to Northwestern University.’
This language cannot be interpreted as creating anything but a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, and the court so held.”
DQE8: In a deleted passage in its discussion of McElvain, the court says
that
“as an action in ejectment was brought…, the difference between a fee simple determinable and a fee simple subject to a condition
subsequent would have no practical effect ….”
Why does it believe this?
Mahrenholz v. County Board
DQs E9-E12 Fleetwood Mac
Mahrenholz v. County Board
To the Trustees of School District No. 1:
"to be used for school purpose only; otherwise to revert to
Grantors herein.”
DQE9: Fee Simple DeterminableDQE9: Fee Simple Determinable
or
Fee Simple on Condition Fee Simple on Condition Subsequent?Subsequent?
To Trustees of SD No.1: "to be used for school purpose only;
otherwise to revert to Grantors herein.”: FSD
• “only” suggests automatic• condition in 1st clause• “to revert” (v. “may re-enter”) suggests
automatic• similar grants held FSD
To Trustees of SD No.1: "to be used for school purpose only;
otherwise to revert to Grantors herein.” FSCS:
• 2 clauses usually used for FSCS
• No time words
• Most states presume FSCS
Mahrenholz v. County Board
DQE10: Under what circumstances might the
distinction between a fee simple determinable and a fee simple on
condition subsequent be significant?
FSD v. FSCS: Consequences
• Transferability after breach (Mahrenholz)
FSD v. FSCS: Consequences
• Transferability after breach
• Adverse Possession
FSD v. FSCS: Consequences
• Transferability after breach
• Adverse Possession
• Income from land after breach (to grantor if FSD)
FSD v. FSCS: Consequences
• Transferability after breach
• Adverse Possession
• Income from land after breach
• Waiver/Estoppel by future interest holder (possible if FSCS)
DQE10: Why do so many grants fail to
indicate clearly which interest is intended?
DQE11:
IS STORAGE A “SCHOOL PURPOSE”?
ARGUMENTS
DQE11:
IS STORAGE A “SCHOOL PURPOSE”?
What legal research could you do to help resolve this
question?
DQE11: IS STORAGE A “SCHOOL PURPOSE”?: RESEARCH
LEGAL: CASES ON “SCHOOL PURPOSE”
CASES ON “CHURCH PURPOSE” ETC.
FACTUAL: WHAT FACTS MATTER ?
DQE11: IS STORAGE A “SCHOOL PURPOSE”?: RESEARCH
FACTUAL: GRANTOR’S INTENTIN GRANT ITSELF
WITNESSES TO TRANSACTIONASK GRANTOR
WITNESSES RE GRANTOR BELIEFS
DQE12. Why should we allow grantors to have any
control at all of what happens to land after they
have died?
PROBLEMS I-L
Featuring The Grateful Dead
(I) O conveys "to J and her heirs so long as the premises are not used for sale of beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or liquor is sold on the premises, O retains a right to re-enter the premises." J opens a restaurant that serves several dishes cooked with wine or flamed with brandy and at Sunday brunch offers a free glass of cham- pagne. The restaurant is successful, and 11 years after its opening D wants to buy it and add a bar. Advise D.
PROBLEM I: MULTI-STEP ANALYSIS
• FSD or FSCS?
• CONDITION VIOLATED?
• EFFECT OF VIOLATION?
• ADVICE RE PURCHASE
PROBLEM I: MULTI-STEP ANALYSIS
• FSD or FSCS?• CONDITION VIOLATED?
• EFFECT OF VIOLATION?
• ADVICE RE PURCHASE
(I): O “To Julia and her heirs so long as the premises are not used for sale of beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or liquor is sold on the premises, Orrin retains a right to re-enter the premises."
Does Orrin’s interest vest automatically (FSD) or does
he have to act (FSCS)?
(I): “To Julia and her heirs so long as the premises are not used for sale of beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or liquor is sold on the premises Orrin retains a right to re-enter the premises."
FSD or FSCS?
•“So long as” & condition built into 1st clause suggest FSD
• Moment of violation clear, so can be FSD
•“Right to re-enter” & 2 clauses suggest FSCS
• Most states: presumption favoring FSCS
PROBLEM I: MULTI-STEP ANALYSIS
• FSD or FSCS?
• CONDITION VIOLATED?• EFFECT OF VIOLATION?
• ADVICE RE PURCHASE
(I): O “To J … so long as … premises are not used for sale of beer, wine, or liquor, and if beer, wine, or liquor is sold on ... premises O retains a right to re-enter….” DOES IT VIOLATE GRANT IF J’s restaurant:(i) serves several dishes cooked with wine or flamed with brandy? (ii) at Sunday brunch offers complimentary glass of champagne?