Property Multiple Choice Question

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
sweetdee
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:52 pm

Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby sweetdee » Fri Dec 03, 2010 5:31 pm

This is from a final exam for my property instructor...
"James conveys Blackacre 'to Burt and such of his children who survive him.' The quoted words are best described as:
(a) Words of limitation
(b) Words of purchase
(c) Words creating a life estate and a vested remainder
(d) Words creating a fee simple in Burt followed by a contingent remainder."

I've asked several people, and we can't come up with a consensus.
I'm pretty sure it's (b), but a solid answer would be great.

User avatar
MBZags
Posts: 552
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 5:21 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby MBZags » Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:28 pm

It seems like it would be B, simply because it doesn't look like there's actually a remainder.

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby JCougar » Fri Dec 03, 2010 10:17 pm

That's really just "Burt and his heirs" paraphrased. So to me, it looks like a fee simple absolute, so you can rule out C and D. "To Burt" are definitely words of purchase...the only thing I'm not totally sure of is the "and his heirs" paraphrase. My initial thought was that those are words of limitation, but that would make it impossible to answer the multiple choice question...so I'd guess B.

I have yet to outline estates...I'll be getting to that tonight.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Helmholtz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:06 pm

On first glance, it seems to be D. I have no idea how it could be B. Am I completely missing something here?

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Helmholtz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:10 pm

JCougar wrote:That's really just "Burt and his heirs" paraphrased.


Children and heirs are completely differently concepts though.

BCLS
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby BCLS » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:11 pm

Helmholtz wrote:On first glance, it seems to be D. I have no idea how it could be B. Am I completely missing something here?

Helm I'm with you on D. Maybe I'm missing it too?

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby JCougar » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:11 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
JCougar wrote:That's really just "Burt and his heirs" paraphrased.


Children and heirs are completely differently concepts though.


Yeah, you're right.

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby JCougar » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:15 pm

Actually, now I'm leaning C. That sounds like a life estate to Burt, and a vested remainder to any of his children who may or may not survive him.

User avatar
Kilpatrick
Posts: 1073
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:06 am

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Kilpatrick » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:15 pm

None of them look right. It's definitely not A or B. If that was supposed to be a paraphrase of 'and his heirs' the drafter should be shot. Surviving children and heirs are not even close to the same thing.

It's not D because there is no remainder if there is a fee simple absolute

C is probably the best even though there's not really a way to know if the children are vested or not. But that sounds the closest. So if Burt has children that are ascertained, they would have vested remainders subject to open.

BCLS
Posts: 567
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:40 am

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby BCLS » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:17 pm

Ahh that makes sense!

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby JCougar » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:18 pm

Yeah, it can't be D because it's not a fee simple if there is a remainder, right?

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Helmholtz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:19 pm

JCougar wrote:Actually, now I'm leaning C. That sounds like a life estate to Burt, and a vested remainder to any of his children who may or may not survive him.


I don't think it's vested subject to open because any children's interests are subject to a condition precedent.

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby JCougar » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:23 pm

This question is driving me crazy.

I think it's time for me to get back to my outline. I'm in no condition to answer estate questions at the moment.

User avatar
SeymourShowz
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:04 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby SeymourShowz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:23 pm

It can't be D because you can't give someone an FSA and then specify who it goes to afterwards (other than just plain ol' heirs)

It can't be C because you can't have a vested remainder if he doesn't have children, and if he did have any children it would be a vested remainder subject to open.

I think the correct answer is A, through process of elimination. The only other choice is B, but I think words of purchase are strictly defined as "O to A" or "O to B" or whatever.
Last edited by SeymourShowz on Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Helmholtz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:24 pm

JCougar wrote:Yeah, it can't be D because it's not a fee simple if there is a remainder, right?


No, things like executory interests can cut off fee simples.

User avatar
Borhas
Posts: 4856
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:09 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Borhas » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:24 pm

it's c


It can't be C because you can't have a vested remainder if he doesn't have children, and if he did have an children it would be a vested remainder subject to open.



a vested remainder subject to open is a type of vested remainder though
Last edited by Borhas on Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Helmholtz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:25 pm

Borhas wrote:it's c


Are we just assuming that he has present children (thereby creating a vested remainder subject to open)?

User avatar
Kilpatrick
Posts: 1073
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:06 am

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Kilpatrick » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:26 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
JCougar wrote:Actually, now I'm leaning C. That sounds like a life estate to Burt, and a vested remainder to any of his children who may or may not survive him.


I don't think it's vested subject to open because any children's interests are subject to a condition precedent.


I don't think that's right. The "condition" for the children is only that they outlive the father. That's just the natural termination of the life estate.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Helmholtz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:28 pm

Kilpatrick wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:
JCougar wrote:Actually, now I'm leaning C. That sounds like a life estate to Burt, and a vested remainder to any of his children who may or may not survive him.


I don't think it's vested subject to open because any children's interests are subject to a condition precedent.


I don't think that's right. The "condition" for the children is only that they outlive the father. That's just the natural termination of the life estate.


According to Gilberts (which was written by my property prof): "To A, then to A's surviving children" creates a contingent remainder in the children if none are alive.

User avatar
Borhas
Posts: 4856
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:09 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Borhas » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:28 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
Borhas wrote:it's c


Are we just assuming that he has present children (thereby creating a vested remainder subject to open)?


yes kind of but I thought the "As such of" means they already exist


seems kind of weird to use the word "survive" as part of the interpretation for the life estate and the condition right?
Last edited by Borhas on Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Helmholtz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:30 pm

Kilpatrick wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:
JCougar wrote:Actually, now I'm leaning C. That sounds like a life estate to Burt, and a vested remainder to any of his children who may or may not survive him.


I don't think it's vested subject to open because any children's interests are subject to a condition precedent.


I don't think that's right. The "condition" for the children is only that they outlive the father. That's just the natural termination of the life estate.


It's not just the natural termination of the life estate. If it was that, it seems like it would be "O to A for life, then to B." B has an indefeasibly vested remainder following the natural termination and is not subject to any condition precedent (i.e. survival).

User avatar
SeymourShowz
Posts: 164
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:04 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby SeymourShowz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:32 pm

Helmholtz wrote:According to Gilberts (which was written by my property prof): "To A, then to A's surviving children" creates a contingent remainder in the children if none are alive.


that's correct, but if he had kids it would be vested remainder subject to open.

so there's no way C is correct

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby JCougar » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:32 pm

It is a vested remainder if the children already exist. If the children don't exist, then I don't know.

User avatar
Kilpatrick
Posts: 1073
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:06 am

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Kilpatrick » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:35 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
Kilpatrick wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:
JCougar wrote:Actually, now I'm leaning C. That sounds like a life estate to Burt, and a vested remainder to any of his children who may or may not survive him.


I don't think it's vested subject to open because any children's interests are subject to a condition precedent.


I don't think that's right. The "condition" for the children is only that they outlive the father. That's just the natural termination of the life estate.


It's not just the natural termination of the life estate. If it was that, it seems like it would be "O to A for life, then to B." B has an indefeasibly vested remainder following the natural termination and is not subject to any condition precedent (i.e. survival).


Ok, I think you are right. I was thinking of a problem that went "to A for life and in the event of A's death to B and her heirs" which my prof. gave as an example of a trap.

So it's definitely C

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: Property Multiple Choice Question

Postby Helmholtz » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:35 pm

SeymourShowz wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:According to Gilberts (which was written by my property prof): "To A, then to A's surviving children" creates a contingent remainder in the children if none are alive.


that's correct, but if he had kids it would be vested remainder subject to open.

so there's no way C is correct


No, I know. I wasn't arguing for C for the main reason that presence of existing children were not mentioned.

Also, isn't James keeping a possibility of reverter here?

I'm still missing how it could be A or B.

"to Burt" sounds like the words of purchase and "and such of his children who survive him" sound like the words of limitation.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher and 10 guests