Forfeiture Question

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
LSATmakesMeNeurotic
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 9:17 am

Forfeiture Question

Postby LSATmakesMeNeurotic » Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:27 pm

O to A for life, then to B for life, then to C for life.

A quitclaims to O. What does B have?

B is convicted for killing C. What does O have?

I'm confused about rules of forfeiture.

NotMyRealName09
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:50 pm

Re: Forfeiture Question

Postby NotMyRealName09 » Thu Mar 01, 2012 12:10 am

LSATmakesMeNeurotic wrote:O to A for life, then to B for life, then to C for life.

A quitclaims to O. What does B have?

B is convicted for killing C. What does O have?

I'm confused about rules of forfeiture.


Ill try, but I didn't refresh my memory on this, so if I'm wrong, let's hear it. I'm assuming these were meant to be read in sequence.

A quitclaims to O. What does B have? B has a life estate that begins when A dies.

B is convicted for killing C. What does O have? A reversionary interest in fee simple that begins upon the death of B. Bs murder of C doesn't benefit B vis-a-vis the life estate, so he doesn't forfeit the life estate. But had C murdered B, he would forfeit his life estate as his crime benefited him by giving him a possessory interest sooner than he would have without the murder.

Is this law?

nymario
Posts: 239
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:57 pm

Re: Forfeiture Question

Postby nymario » Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:32 am

LSATmakesMeNeurotic wrote:O to A for life, then to B for life, then to C for life.

A quitclaims to O. What does B have?

B is convicted for killing C. What does O have?

I'm confused about rules of forfeiture.



1. B has a contingent remainder in a life estate (contingent on B outliving A). If I recall correctly, when outliving the predecessor-in-interest is the only condition, it can also just be considered a vested remainder.

2. O has a life estate pur autre vie measured by A's life (which is what he had after the quitclaim). When A dies (assuming B is alive), O will have a reversion in fee simple absolute. If B dies while A is still living, O just has a fee simple absolute.

As the above poster correctly pointed out, B doesn't forfeit his interest in the estate just because he murdered someone who wasn't going to take until he died anyway...

User avatar
fundamentallybroken
Posts: 663
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:52 am

Re: Forfeiture Question

Postby fundamentallybroken » Thu Mar 01, 2012 3:08 pm

nymario wrote:
LSATmakesMeNeurotic wrote:O to A for life, then to B for life, then to C for life.

A quitclaims to O. What does B have?

B is convicted for killing C. What does O have?

I'm confused about rules of forfeiture.



1. B has a contingent remainder in a life estate (contingent on B outliving A). If I recall correctly, when outliving the predecessor-in-interest is the only condition, it can also just be considered a vested remainder.

2. O has a life estate pur autre vie measured by A's life (which is what he had after the quitclaim). When A dies (assuming B is alive), O will have a reversion in fee simple absolute. If B dies while A is still living, O just has a fee simple absolute.

As the above poster correctly pointed out, B doesn't forfeit his interest in the estate just because he murdered someone who wasn't going to take until he died anyway...


But doesn't A's quitclaim to O just put everything back in to O as fee simple absolute, thus destroying contingent remainders?

My property class is a strange animal, and this is how we would have approached the problem, but that doesn't mean it bears relation to how others may handle it...

NotMyRealName09
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:50 pm

Re: Forfeiture Question

Postby NotMyRealName09 » Thu Mar 01, 2012 4:28 pm

A can only quitclaim the interest it has - the life estate. A's quitclaim doesn't impact B and C's contingent remainders in a life estate.

A could have quit claimed to D and the result would have been the same - B would have a contingent remainder in a life estate (contingent on outliving A).

I aced property back in the day, but I'm not up on my terminology (or the bullshit rules) as much as I was the night before the exam when I crammed it all in there. I found the rules elegant and non-intuitive, strangely satisfying to figure out. Obviously, I've lost my touch.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media, peger and 7 guests