Top Law Schools

I don't understand what the difference b/t a condition precedent and a condition subsequent is

Also, what is the difference between a fee simple subject to condition subsequent and a vested remainder subject to divestment?

in the case of a fee simple subj to condition subsequent, the fee simple can be divested by the occurrence of a condition..and with a vested remainder subject to total divestment, the remainder can be divested by the occurrence of a condition...? so whats the difference? aside from the fact that in a fsscs, it is a fee simple and in the vested remainder subject to total divestment we can be dealing with a life estate, fee simple, or term of years...

so confused

goosey wrote:I don't understand what the difference b/t a condition precedent and a condition subsequent is

Also, what is the difference between a fee simple subject to condition subsequent and a vested remainder subject to divestment?

in the case of a fee simple subj to condition subsequent, the fee simple can be divested by the occurrence of a condition..and with a vested remainder subject to total divestment, the remainder can be divested by the occurrence of a condition...? so whats the difference? aside from the fact that in a fsscs, it is a fee simple and in the vested remainder subject to total divestment we can be dealing with a life estate, fee simple, or term of years...

so confused

A condition Subsequent=An event that upon its occurrence would terminate an estate. Ex. O to A, but if A ever opens a bar on the land, then back to O. Here you have A with an estate in fee, on a condition that he cannot use the land as a bar. Upon the event that a bar should be opened on the property, his interest would be terminated and since the grantor holds a reversion it would go back to O.

A condition Precedent=An event that upon its occurrence would trigger some event/or interest. Ex. O to A for life, then to B if B has reached the age of 25. Here we have a life estate in A that will end naturally. Holds the present possessory interest, with B holding the future fee interest. B can only receive the interest if he reaches the age of 25 before A dies. So in other words, B turning 25 before A dies is a condition precedent to B receiving the interest.

A vested remainder subject to divestment=You have an ascertained person holding a vested future interest in land, but there is an event that could occur that could divest that interest, resulting in the interest going to another grantee. Ex. O to A, then to B, but if B predeceases A, then to C. Here, you have a present possessory interest in Life estate with A. Be is a vested grantee holding the remainder. However, that interest can be divested if B dies before A, resulting in C receiving the vested remainder.
The easiest distinction I can think of is to say that with a Fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, the future interest is a reversion in the Grantor. In a vested remainder subject to divestment, if the condition causing the divestment occurs, the future interest is held by the grantee. In the vested Remainder subject to divestment, if A dies and B is still alive, C’s interest is extinguished and B receives an estate in fee.

We went over this stuff last semester so it’s a little fuzzy but I hope this helps.

Edit to clarify

Long time lurker, first time poster.

Do you understand that a FSSCS is a present possessory estate and remainders (both vested/contingent) are future interests?

goosey wrote:I don't understand what the difference b/t a condition precedent and a condition subsequent is

Also, what is the difference between a fee simple subject to condition subsequent and a vested remainder subject to divestment?

in the case of a fee simple subj to condition subsequent, the fee simple can be divested by the occurrence of a condition..and with a vested remainder subject to total divestment, the remainder can be divested by the occurrence of a condition...? so whats the difference? aside from the fact that in a fsscs, it is a fee simple and in the vested remainder subject to total divestment we can be dealing with a life estate, fee simple, or term of years...

so confused

Condition precedant is something that has to occur BEFORE the future interests ever grants the holder title. So basically "A to B for life, then if C is married to C." If C isn't married they never get the property.

In contrast, with condition subsequent, you basically GET the property (as a Fee SImple Determinable most likely), and THEN you can lose it if the condition isnt met. "A to B for life, then to C as long as C keeps farming the land." C obtains the farm automatically upon B's death and just needs to keep completing the conditions to keep it"

As for your second question, you are confusing present estates and future estates. a Fee Simple Subject to Condition Subsequent (Fee simple Determinable I assume is what you mean, at least thats what my prof calls it) is a present interest/estate, you already HAVE the property under this title. A Vested Remainder subject to complete divestment is a FUTURE interest, you DON'T have the property yet but your future interest in obtaining it at some point may be completely destroyed if some condition occurs.

http://www.amazon.com/Possessory-Estate ... 0314183698

Look at this book -- even an old edition borrowed from your library. It'll only take you about 4 hours to work thru the exercises and everything will be crystal clear by the end. You do have to work thru the whole thing tho. I tried to start in the middle and found out that the pre1680 (or whatever year) was necessary to learn as a building block to the next thing.

I just ran through this set of problems and found it worthwhile.

Another helpful document.

http://www.mediafire.com/?dm3k38de3ec6mwf

Has a lot of examples. Check it out. Use Control+F to skip through the irrelevant stuff.

More estates fun here (LinkRemoved). 100 questions. Do this until you have it down. It's pretty awesome.

Thanks to everyone who posted estates/FI problems <3.

keg411 wrote:Thanks to everyone who posted estates/FI problems <3.

Was meaning to tell you, Keg, that I spoke to my professor about that little discussion we had about divestiture. And I was so painfully wrong its not even funny

dakatz wrote:

keg411 wrote:Thanks to everyone who posted estates/FI problems <3.

Was meaning to tell you, Keg, that I spoke to my professor about that little discussion we had about divestiture. And I was so painfully wrong its not even funny

I barely remember that discussion, but .

luckyduck wrote:http://www.amazon.com/Possessory-Estate ... 0314183698

Look at this book -- even an old edition borrowed from your library. It'll only take you about 4 hours to work thru the exercises and everything will be crystal clear by the end. You do have to work thru the whole thing tho. I tried to start in the middle and found out that the pre1680 (or whatever year) was necessary to learn as a building block to the next thing.

Best book on the subject I ever bought, have been going through it slowly all semester.

savagedm wrote:

luckyduck wrote:http://www.amazon.com/Possessory-Estate ... 0314183698

Look at this book -- even an old edition borrowed from your library. It'll only take you about 4 hours to work thru the exercises and everything will be crystal clear by the end. You do have to work thru the whole thing tho. I tried to start in the middle and found out that the pre1680 (or whatever year) was necessary to learn as a building block to the next thing.

Best book on the subject I ever bought, have been going through it slowly all semester.

my library doesnt have it but yeah..spent the past 2 days learning future interests and feel better about it--thanks for all the responses. will work on practice questions until I have it down cold, but re-reading the casebook and gilbert helped