Q: O to A for life than to A’s children who turn 18. A has no children now.
A: A has a life estate. Children have a contingent remainder. The rule applies because the
children are in a suspect class. After killing all the people in the contract and wait 21 years, A could
have a child so RAP does not void the interest. A ends up with a life estate and O has a possibility
of reversion.
How are the children in a suspect class? I thought that you would know for certain at the death of A + 21 years whether or not he would have any children and if they would turn 18 or not.
Quick RAP problem Forum
- Kilpatrick
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:06 am
Re: Quick RAP problem
I don't know what a suspect class is, I don't think my professor ever used that term. But RAP applies because it always applies to contingent remainders.
A has a life estate
A is the validating life
When A dies we will know how many children he has. Even if he has a child still in the womb they will turn 18 in less than 21 years, so RAP is not violated.
A has a life estate
A is the validating life
When A dies we will know how many children he has. Even if he has a child still in the womb they will turn 18 in less than 21 years, so RAP is not violated.
-
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 4:36 pm
Re: Quick RAP problem
Oops! Sorry, I misread the question as saying that the RAP does void the interest. I copied the answer verbatim and it tripped me up because the last statement of the answer didn't mention anything about A's children so I assumed the interest was void. Hypothetically, if this question was given on an exam, would it be okay to leave out A's children having a contingent remainder?
- Kilpatrick
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:06 am
Re: Quick RAP problem
FOund this while googling "suspect class"
http://nsulaw.nova.edu/faculty/document ... _exam3.PDF
These answers are really strangely written
EDIT: And yeah I'm pretty sure you have to say the children have a contingent remainder. Especially if the question asks you to identify all the interests. If it just asks does it violate RAP then maybe not but its probably still a good idea
http://nsulaw.nova.edu/faculty/document ... _exam3.PDF
These answers are really strangely written
EDIT: And yeah I'm pretty sure you have to say the children have a contingent remainder. Especially if the question asks you to identify all the interests. If it just asks does it violate RAP then maybe not but its probably still a good idea
-
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 4:36 pm
Re: Quick RAP problem
haha yeah I was just googling RAP hypos and found those so I'm just reviewing them briefly, thanks for the help!
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login