Top Law Schools

A conveys to M for life, then to M's children and their heirs, but if at M's death she is not survived by any children, then to D and his heirs.

At time of conveyance, M has no children, but five years later, she has two children E and J. E predeceases M, but J survives M.

My only question is that does E's heirs get a cut?

M's kids have alternative contingent remainders, I understand, but if only one of the kids survive, does the other kid who did not survive still get a cut because at least one survived? Or is this a situation where it does not vest until M's death and only in the surviving kids.

Thanks

Also similar question -

O conveys to T for life, then to A, but if A is childless at T's death, then to H and her heirs.

Alternative contingent remainders or vested remainder subject to complete divestment?

rli66 wrote:Also similar question -

O conveys to T for life, then to A, but if A is childless at T's death, then to H and her heirs.

Alternative contingent remainders or vested remainder subject to complete divestment?

Edit: Jessuf is right on this one.

Edit: If I had to guess at your 1st one, I'd say J gets the entire portion with no cutting. Although this is probably an example where it's so close that recognizing argument for both sides is more important than the actual result.

.

.