Property Flashcards
(98 cards)
Defeasible Fees
Like a fee simple absolute estate, a defeasible fee is ownership of potentially infinite duration and is freely alienable (i.e., transferable during life or upon death). But, a defeasible fee may be terminated by the occurrence of an event
TYPES:
Fee simple determinable
- Durational: “so long as,” “during,” “until”
- Grantor’s possibility of reverter (automatic)
Fee simple subject to condition subsequent
- Conditional: “but if,” “provided that,” “unless”
- Grantor’s right of reentry (not automatic, grantor must affirmatively demonstrates intent to terminate. owner may waive the right to reenter, but the mere failure to assert it does not constitute a waiver)
Fee simple subject to executory interest
- Durational or conditional
- Third party’s executory interest
Life Estates
Life estate is a present possessory estate that is limited in duration by a life. - measured by grantee’s life or life estate pur autre vie
The holder is “life tenant.”
When the future interest is held by a third person, the future interest is a REMAINDER.
When the future interest that follows a life estate is specifically held by the grantor or there is no subsequent interest mentioned in the conveyance–> REVERSION
Rights of a life tenant
A life tenant has the right to possess the property, as well as the right to lease, sell, or mortgage his interest in the property (i.e., right of alienation).
1) Rents
2) Profits (a right to take natural resources from the land e.g., oil, gas, minerals, timber).
When the grantor expressly or impliedly gives the life tenant a right to profits, the life tenant may take such resources. If such resources were already being taken when a life estate became possessory, there is a presumption that the grantor intended the life tenant to have the right to profits.
When this right is not expressly or impliedly given to the life tenant, exploitation of natural resources can constitute waste
3) Sale of property
Generally, a life tenant can only sell her life estate when the future interest holders agree to the sale of the property in fee simple. However, in a majority of jurisdictions, a life tenant may seek a court order compelling the sale of the property in fee simple when future interest holders cannot be ascertained or are unwilling to sell the property.
How does the doctrine of waste limit the rights of a life tenant?
Under the doctrine of waste, a life tenant generally must deliver the property to the future interest holder in substantially the same condition that it was in when she took possession, with allowance for normal wear and tear.
A grantor may alter or eliminate the doctrine of waste regarding the life tenant. Also, the life tenant’s conduct is not considered waste if the future interest holders consent to the conduct.
1) Permissive waste - life tenant permits the premises to deteriorate through neglect or a failure to preserve or protect the property.
2) Voluntary/Affirmative waste - a life tenant’s affirmative action that results in the diminution in value of the property is prohibited by the doctrine of waste.
b) Ameliorative waste occurs - when the life tenant’s affirmative action substantially changes the condition of the property but does not diminish the value of the property
Although the doctrine of waste typically arises in the context of a life estate, it may arise from abuse, neglect, or improvement of the property by any person who holds a present interest that is not a fee simple (e.g., a defeasible fee). The holder of a future interest in the property (e.g., remainder, executory interest) may enter the land to inspect for waste.
The holder of a vested future interest may bring suit against the present interest holder for damages, and the holder of any future interest may bring suit for an injunction. Some jurisdictions recognize an action for treble damages or forfeiture against a life tenant for voluntary waste.
Iife tenant’s duty to prevent permissive waste
a) Repairs
A life tenant has a duty to prevent permissive waste by making reasonable repairs. This duty constitutes a personal obligation of the life tenant only to the extent that the life tenant receives a financial benefit from the property. The life tenant is only obligated to pay up to:
i) The amount of income generated by the property; or
ii) The fair rental value of the property if the life tenant uses the property (e.g., farms the land, occupies the residence).
b) Damage caused by natural forces or third parties
In most jurisdictions, the life tenant is NOT responsible for damage caused by natural forces or third parties that the life tenant could not prevent.
c) Insurance
In most jurisdictions, the life tenant is NOT under an obligation to insure the land for the benefit of the future interest holder.
Is ameliorative waste allowed?
At common law, ameliorative waste was prohibited because it changed the condition of the property. In most jurisdictions today, ameliorative waste is permitted when the change results in reasonable use of the property. In determining the reasonableness of a change, the life tenant’s life expectancy and good faith in making the change are factors to be considered.
A life tenant has a duty not to change the premises if the future interest holders have a reasonable ground for objection. However, a reasonable ground for objection does not exist if:
i) A substantial and permanent change in neighborhood surroundings makes the change necessary to continue reasonable use of the property; and
ii) The proposed change is one that an owner of a fee simple estate would typically make.
3) Legal action by future interest holder
A vested remainder is an interest that is:
1) Given to an ascertained grantee (i.e., someone who can be identified); and
2) Not subject to a condition precedent
If the remainder fails either 1 or 2, it is a CONTINGENT remainder.
If a contingent remainder does not vest before it becomes possessory (e.g., A does not have any grandchildren before A dies), the grantor has a REVERSION.
A vested remainder subject to open/”partial divestment” exists when:
1) A remainder interest is transferred to a GROUP rather than named individuals (e.g., children, grandchildren); and
2) AT LEAST one member of the group is individually ascertainable and entitled to the remainder interest; but
3) That person might be required to SHARE the interest with other members of the group
(vs A vested remainder subject to complete divestment indicates that the occurrence of a condition subsequent will completely divest the remainder interest.)
If no one in the class has vested, then it’s contingent
What happens when a holder of a vested remainder dies?
It passes onto the holder’s heirs (it’s inheritable)
Rule of Convenience
If the grant does not have an express closing date, the Rule of Convenience closes the class when any member of the class becomes entitled to immediate possession.
It closes the class to avoid application of the rule of perpetuities to a class gift.
Doctrine of Worthier Title
Creates a presumption of a reversion to the grantor that prevents against remainders in a grantor’s heirs.
E.g. Oliver conveys “to Anna for life, then to my heirs.” –> Oliver has a reversion
Rule in Shelley’s Case
Prevents against remainders in a
grantee’s heirs. Uses the doctrine of merger to create a fee simple
Oliver conveys “to Anna for life, then to Anna’s heirs.” –> Anna has a fee simple
Executory Interests
A future interest that divests a prior vested interest.
Springing executory interest: Divests the grantor
Shifting executory interest: Divests a prior grantee
Rule Against Perpetuities
If a portion of a transfer violates RAP, that portion is void, the rest is valid
HOW LONG? a life + 21 years
WHEN?
- Inter vivos transfers: Interests created at time of the grant
- Devise (will): Interests created at testator’s death
WHAT? RAP applies to executory interests, contingent remainders, and class gifts
WHO?
- Relevant life: Person who affects vesting
- Validating life: Person who tells us whether or not the interest vests within the perpetuities period (lifetime plus 21 years)
Must have been alive when the interests were created;
Can validate her own interest;
If no validating life, then violates RAP so we strike it from the grant; if there is a validating life, the interest is good (no violation)
Special rule for RAP for class gifts
If the gift to any member of the class is void under RAP, then the gift is void as to all members of the class. The gift is “bad as to one, bad as to all.” (The “all or nothing” rule.)
BUT Rule of Convenience
* An interpretative rule
* Can save a class gift from being invalidated under RAP
* To avoiding RAP, the class closes as soon as a member of the class is entitled to immediate possession.
EXCEPTIONS (RAP doesn’t apply to:)
* Transfers of a specific dollar amount to each class member, and
* Transfers to a subclass that vests at a specific time, e.g., “to the children of B, and upon the death of each, to that child’s issue”
Exceptions to RAP
1) Charities - RAP does not apply to charity-to-charity gifts.
2) Options - RAP does not apply to an option held by a current tenant to
purchase a fee interest in the leasehold property. Nor does it apply to an option (or right of first refusal) in a commercial transaction.
Modern “Wait and See” Approach
“wait and see” if an interest subject to RAP vests within the perpetuities period.
Some of these states changed the vesting period to 90 years
Cy Pres
An equitable doctrine that allows a court to reform a transfer to avoid RAP.
Joint Tenancy
PITT
Possession: Every JT has an equal right to possess the whole of the property.
Interest: JTs must have an equal share of the same type of interest.
* Time: JTs must receive their interests at the same time
* Title: JTs must receive their interests in the same instrument of title
–> right of survivorship
Grantor must make a clear expression of intent + Must be survivorship language (e.g., “as joint tenants with a right of survivorship.”)
Mortgages: A joint tenant grants a mortgage interest in the joint tenancy to a creditor.
Does the mortgage sever the joint tenancy?
Most jurisdictions treat the mortgage as a lien, so it does not destroy the joint tenancy.
A minority of jurisdictions follows a title
theory. The mortgage severs title and the tenancy between the joint tenants and the creditor is converted into a tenancy in common
Leases: A joint tenant leases her share in the property to a tenant. Does the lease sever the joint tenancy?
Jurisdictions are split.
Some hold that the lease SEVERS the JT
Some treat the lease as a TEMPORARY SUSPENSION of the joint tenancy.
Tenancy by the Entirety
= Joint tenancy between married spouses (marriage is the 5th unity)
- Has a right of survivorship.
- Tenants by the entirety CANOT alienate or encumber their shares without the consent of their spouse.
Must say: Property conveyed “as tenants by the entirety, with a right of survivorship”
* If the grant is ambiguous, courts presume property is held as joint tenants or as tenants in
common
Possession Rights of JTs/TCs
Unless there is an agreement to the contrary, each cotenant has the right to possess all of the property.
Under the majority rule, a cotenant is NOT required to pay rent to the other cotenants for the value of her own use of the property, even when the other cotenants do not make use of the property, and a cotenant is generally NOT required to share profits earned from the use of the property, such as from a business conducted on the property.
Under minority rule, a cotenant who is in exclusive use of the property MUST provide an accounting to the other cotenants for the reasonable rental value of the property less any necessary expenses.
Because of each tenant’s right to possess the entire property, a cotenant’s exclusive use of the property does not, by itself, give rise to adverse possession of the interest of another cotenant.
Natural resources: A cotenant is entitled to the land’s natural resources (e.g., timber, minerals, oil, gas) in proportion to her ownership share.
Ouster
What happens wen a cotenant refuses to allow another cotenant access to the property?
the ousted cotenant may bring a court action (e.g., an injunction) to gain access to the property and to recover the value of the use of the property for the time during which the cotenant was denied access to the property.
Under the majority rule, a cotenant in exclusive possession of the property who merely rejects a demand to pay rent or vacate a portion of the premises has not committed ouster. The cotenant in possession must refuse a demand by another cotenant to use the property.