Savings clause: “All of these interests terminate 21 years after X’s death” – as a result, no

interest vests more than 21 years after a measuring life (X)

Means no interests are invalid
RAP: No interest is valid unless it must vest, if at all, no later than 21 years after some life
in being at the creation of the interest
“Must vest” Means interest HAS to vest in time to be valid- if it might vest, might not vest, not
kosher, violates RAP
What does vesting mean? Not possession- just that the remainder becomes vested, i.e.. it
becomes certain who grantees are, that they will get property eventually
Example: remainder to “A’s grandchildren”
Interest vests when we know who A’s grandchildren are, i.e. when all of A’s children are dead.
Example 2: remainder to “A’s grandchildren living at the time of A’s death”
Interest vests as soon as A dies because that’s when we know who A’s grandchildren living at
the time of A’s death are.

If its likely to vest in time but might vest too late, still a violation

“if at all”- if interest might not vest but if it does vest it vests within 21 yrs? Not a problem even
if vesting unlikely (example:
“To A for life, then to B if A is abducted by aliens”- B’s interest unlikely to vest but if it does it
will vest during A’s life. Because interest IF it vests will vest within A’s life, interest is valid.
What interests are subject to Rule? Contingent remainders, executory interests, Vested subject to
open (because if gift void as to one member of a class its usually void as to all)
NOT subject- fee, life estate, vested remainder other than VSO, no reversionary interests
(reversion, Poss of reverter, life estates)
THIS MEANS THE COMMA RULE REALLY MATTERS- CONTINGENT REMAINDERS
SUBJECT TO RAP, VESTED REMAINDERS SUBJECT TO COMP DIVESTMENT ARE
NOT.
“void as to one, void as to all”- if class gift and void as to one member of class (usually because
unborn) void as to all
To A for life, then to A’s grandchildren
Who is a “life in being” (aka measuring life)? Usually somebody who is named in the grant, or
their ancestors.
To A for life, then to A’s grandchildren
Measuring life- A (assuming he’s still alive)
Why not A’s children? Answer – at the time of the grant, if A alive, we don’t know who all of
A’s children are.

Measuring as of when? As of “creation of interest”- when is that?

ANSWER- deed – when deed executed
Will- when grantor dies.
If A is alive when grantor dies, A is only measuring life.
If A dies before grantor, A’s children becoming measuring lives if gift by will- key issue: who is
alive when grantor dies if gift a will?
Interest is valid if it has to vest (if at all) within 21 years of A”s death.).
Example of “To A then to A’s grandchildren”
If A alive of time of grantor’s death only A is alive, problematic for grandchildren.
How would a lawyer avoid this problem to make gift valid? Grandchildren alive at the time of
A’s death, because their interest vests 0 yrs after last measuring life
OR “To A for life, then to A’s grandchildren alive at the time of my death, THEN to A’s
grandchildren alive at the time of the death of those grandchildren.”

When is vesting event- that is, when does interest of gandchildren vest?
When children die because until then we won’t know who grandchildren are
Issue: must the vesting event (last of A’s children die) happen within 21 yrs of the death of A?
Result: No, so gift invalid- because one of A”s children might die 50 yrs later.
Jee v. Audley
Gift: read by court as “to wife for life,
Then to my niece Mary Hale and the legitimate issue of her body, (i.e. her bloodline, like in a fee
tail) – as soon as wife dies, Mary Hale now has a fee tail at common law. Under modern law, fee
tail dead. Mary Hale would have indefeasibly vested remainder before wife dies, and a fee
simple absolute afterwards.
Then to the daughters then living of John and Elizabeth Lee”
Measuring lifes- wife, Hale, the Jees
Issue: what about the remainder of the “daughters then living”?
Vesting event- when “issue of her body” runs out- could be great great great great great
grandchildren.
Is that event necessarily going to be within 21 yrs of the death of the lives in being (Hale, wife,
Jees)? MIGHT NOT BE because might be 600 yrs from now
Counterargument: the Jees are really old so therefore no more daughters will be born and
therefore the daughters should be counted as lives in being.
Court says no
“fertile octogenarian problem” – under common law RAP, we assume that even a 80 yr old can
have kids
What if John and Elizabeth dead? All daughters alive, so gift dead.

Grant “To wife for life, then to Mary Hale, then to the Jee daughters”
Courts would treat gift to Hale but as IVR for life
Two similar gifts:
“To A for life, then to Hale”- Hale has IVR, and once A dies it turns into FSA
“To A for life, then to Hale, then to Jane Jee.” Hale still has IVR but cts treat as IVR for life.
“To A for life, then to Mary Hale and the heirs of her body, then to Jee daughters”- Cts would
probably ignore “heirs of body” because of policy against fee tails
“To A for life, then to Mary Hale, then to her children, then to Jee daughters”- not a fee tail
because children not same as “heirs of body”
ve the gift to A’s grandchildren?
- savings clause (“this trust terminates within 21 yrs of A’s death and then it is distributed to A’s
then living descendants”)
= we know who gets it within 21 yrs of A’s death. Therefore their interest vests at the time.
- “A’s grandchildren living at A’s death”
= “To A for life, then to B for life, then to B’s first child to live to be 25”
Both A and B are measuring lives
Issue for validity: is it possible for child to turn 25 more than 21 yrs after both A and B die?
- General rule: survivorship conditions over 21 yrs (i.e. someone has to live to be an age over 21)
are more likely to violate RAP \
1. “To A for life, then to B if B attains the age of 30”
Measuring lives- A, B
Vesting event- B attains the age of 30
(only has to vest near ONE measuring life)
Will that happen within B’s life? YES so valid
Rule says invalid only when it might vest, if at all, too late
But interest might never vest (here, if B dies before 30) irrelevant to validity
Only needs to vest within/21 years after LAST life in being
If it vests it will vest during life in being (B’s)
“To A for life, then to B for life, then to B’s grandchildren”
Measuring lives- A, B (not B’s children because we don’t know who all of them are)
Vestint event- B’s last child dies (until then we don’t know who grandchildren are so their
interest isn’t vested)
To A for life, then to B for life, then to B’s children”

Measuring lives- A, B
Vesting event- when will we know who B’s kids are? When B dies.
So vests 0 yrs after life in being
Therefore valid
2. “To A for life, then to A’s children for their lives, then to B if he is then alive, and if B is not
alive, to B’s heirs”
Measuring lives- A, B
A’s children: vesting event- When A dies (then we know who kids are)
Hence, valid within 0 seconds of measuring life,, so valid
B: vests if at all it vests during B’s life, so valid
B’s heirs:
We know who B’s heirs are when B dies- at that point remainder becomes vested. Vests 0 yrs
after B dies, so valid
“To A for life, then to A’s children and grandchildren”
We won’t know who the GC are till C die
Possibly more than 21 yrs of A’s death
Invalid if phrased that way
3. “To all member of my class who passes the bar” – all measuring lives, so it vests or fails
during their lifetime, so obviously ok
Second half of 3- “The first child of A who is admitted to the bar”
Measuring life – A
Vesting event- One of A’s children pass bar exam
Is it possible that A’s child could pass bar more than 21 yrs of A’s death? (Assuming A still
alive).
Therefore gift invalid
4. “To A for life, then to A’s children who reach 25.”
Measuring life: A
Vesting event? A’s children reach 25. Until then we don’t know which of As children will have
rights to property
Could that be more than 21 yrs after A’s death? YES
COMMON RAP SCENARIO: SOMEBODY MAKES AGE CONDITION MORE THAN 21
YRS TO INSURE GROWNUP GETS PROPERTY, BUT THIS CAN GO TOO FAR AND
VIOLATE RULE.

BUT does it matter if A has a 26 yr old kid B at time of conveyance.

Does that make remainder valid? What if B dies before O dies? Then he is not a life in being at
time of grantor’s death, so interest still invalid.
B survives O, and then dies before A. So vested because he’s alive and over 25 at time of O’s
death (which is relevant life for purpose of measuring lives) – valid
5. “To A for life, then to A’s widow, then to A’s descendants then living.”
Measuring life- A
Is A’s widow a measuring life? No because widow might be someone not born yet.
A’s widow- is her interest valid? Yes because vests right after A dies.
When does the interest of “A’s descendants then living”- vests when widow dies, which might be
22+ yrs after A dies, hence invalid.
“unborn widow situation” – example of crazy RAP stuff
BY CONTRAST: “To A for life, then to A’s widow, then to A’s descendants living at the
time of A’s death”
Vests when A dies because we know who descendants as soon as A dies, so valid

“To A, then to A’s widow, then to A’s descendants.” (If A has already child, then maybe
VSO- but still have same problems). Late vesting because we won’t know who relevant
descendants are till widow dies.
“To A, then to A”s current wife, then to A’s descendants then living” – A’s current wife is a
measuring life, so interest vests as soon as measuring life dies, thus valid.

6a “To A for life and on A’s death to A’s children (GIFT) for their lives, and upon the
death of A/As children, to B if A dies childless (CONDITION) .”
A’s children’s interest (one already born) – both VSO and VCD
Therefore B has EI because that always follows VCD
Measuring lives- A, B
B’s interest vests as soon as A dies- either A dies childless in which case B gets, or not in
which case B never gets
VALID- B’s interest vests or fail as soon as A dies
6b. “To A for life
and on A’s death to A’s children (GIFT) for their lives,
and upon the death of A/As children, to B if A has no grandchildren then living”
Measuring lives- A, B
When would we know when B’s interest vests or fails? We know when the last of A’s
children die.
(vesting event)
Could this be more than 21 yrs after both A and B die? (gift doesn’t presuppose B has to be
alive to inherit- if B dies early and gift valid, his heirs get it)
YES – A die 2020, B dies 2022 A’s last child dies 2050- more than 21 yrs later
So B’s interest INVALID
6c “To A for life and on A’s death to A’s children (GIFT) for their lives,
and upon the death of A/As children, to B’s children.”
Measuring lives- A, B
Vesting event? When B dies because at that point we know who all B’s kids are
Valid thus- vests as soon as B dies, even if they have to wait decades for possession.
6d “To A for life and on A’s death to A’s children (GIFT) for their lives,
and upon the death of A/As children,
to B’s children then living” [living at the time A’s children die]
Measuring lives- A, B
“then living” means we won’t know which of b’s kids inherit till A’s children die (vesting
event)
Vesting event could be more than 21 yrs after A and B die
Hence remainder in B’s children invalid
How to save – change “then living” to “living at the time of A’s death”
ALL THAT MATTERS is IS IT POSSIBLE INTEREST COULD VEST TOO LATE?
Validity of gift is determined at the moment its created.
6e. “To A for life and on A’s death to A’s children (GIFT) for their lives,
and upon the death of A/As children,
to A’s grandchildren” could ask on exam
Measuring life- A
Vesting event (when do we know who A”s grandchildren are?) - A’s children die
INVALID could be more than 21 yrs after A’s death
RULE OF THUMB Be very suspicious of gifts to grandchildren
6f. “To A for life and on A’s death to A’s children (GIFT) for their lives, and upon the
death of A/As children, to T’s grandchildren” (remember: this is T’s will) = would not ask
question this crazy
Measuring lives- A, if T is dead his children are measuring lives!!! (Relevant to vesting of
interests, and we know who they are as soon as T dies)
Vesting event- when all of T’s children are dead
Gift vests within 0 yrs of measuring lives if T’s kids are measuring lives
If this was a lifetime gift by T- T and A would be only measuring lives, so obviously invalid.
Because this is a will- T dead, so if T dead we know who his kids are, and the kids are
ancestors of beneficiaries here, so therefore the kids are now measuring lives, which makes
this valid.
We don’t know who grandkids are- only shows that gift hasn’t vested YET
But it still vests as soon as children die
Comma rule-
To A for life, then to B, but if B does not live to be 21, to C- B has vcd
To A for life, then to B if B lives to be 21, to C- B has contingent remainder (grantor also
has reversion)