Professional Documents
Culture Documents
9781305579910
Solution Manual:
https://testbankpack.com/p/solution-manual-for-real-estate-law-11th-
edition-jennings-1305579917-9781305579910/
CHAPTER TWO
OBJECTIVES: 1. To describe and explain the various types of present and future land interests and list the
length of those interests and discuss their transferability and characteristics
2. To help students recognize the types of land interests that can be created
3. To discuss the favorable and unfavorable aspects of various forms of land interests and
the rules applicable to them
RESOURCES:
Andersen, “Present and Future Interests: A Graphic Explanation,” 19 Seattle U.L. Rev. 101 (1995).
Becker, “Uniform Probate Code Section 2-707 and the Experienced Estate Planner: Unexpected Disasters and
How to Avoid Them,” 47 UCLA L. Rev. 339 (December, 1999).
Black, “The Historical Background Of Some Modern Real Estate Principles,” 34 Real Est. L. J. 327 (2005).
Burby, Real Property, Chapters 11, 16 and 17.
Dukeminier and Krier, “The Rise of the Perpetual Trust,” 50 UCLA L. Rev. 1303 (2003).
"Dynasty Trusts and the Rule Against Perpetuities," 116 Harv. L. Rev. 2588, 2609 (2003).
Entin, Jonathan L., "Defeasible Fees, State Action," 34 William and Mary L. Rev. 769 (1993).
Foster, "Fifty-One Flowers: Post-Perpetuities War Law and Arkansas's Adoption of USRAP," 29 U. Ark. Little
Rock L. Rev. 411, 487 (2007).
“From the Courts: Technology, Real Estate, and Livery of Seisin,” 41(3) Real Estate L. J. 331-337 (2012).
Harding, “Perpetual Property,” 61 Fla. L. Rev. 285 (April 2009).
Helfman, “Land Ownership and the Origins of Fiduciary Duty,” 41 Real Prop. Prob. & Tr. J. 651 (2006).
Hopperton, “Teaching Present and Future Interests: A Methodology for Students that Unifies Estates in Land
Concepts, Structures, and Principles,” 26 U. Tol. L. Rev. 621 (Spring, 1995).
Jennings, “Real Property Could Use Some Updating,” 24 Real Est. L.J. 103 (Fall 1995).
Mahoney, “Perpetual Restrictions on Land Use and the Problem of the Future,” 88 Va. L. Rev. 739, 743 (June
2002).
Orth, “Requiem for the Rule in Shelley’s Case,” 67 N.C. L. Rev. 681 (1989).
Pollman and Edwards, "Scholarship By Legal Writing Professors: New Voices in the Legal Academy," 11 Legal
Writing: J. Legal Writing Inst. 3, 212 (2005).
Powell, Real Property, Volume 3, 169-260.
Schneider, “A Rule Against Perpetuities For The Twenty-First Century,” 41 Real Prop. Prob. & Tr. J. 743 (Winter
2007).
Singer, “Democratic Estates: Property Law in a Free and Democratic Society,” 94 Cornell L. Rev. 1009 (May
2009).
Waggoner, “The Uniform Statutory Rule Against Perpetuities: The Rationale of the 90-Year Waiting Period,” 73
Cornell L. Rev. 157, 162 (1988).
CASES:
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part, except for use as
permitted in a license distributed with a certain product or service or otherwise on a password-protected website or school-approved learning
management system for classroom use.
- 10 -
LECTURE OUTLINE:
FIGURE 2.1 AND POWERPOINT SLIDE 2-1 PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF ALL PRESENT AND FUTURE LAND
INTERESTS.
A. Freehold Estates – USE POWERPOINT SLIDES 2-2, 2-3, 2-4, AND 2-5
2. Fee – is inheritable
C. Fee Simple Defeasible – unlimited or uncertain in duration with the potential of termination
"To State University so long as the property is used for a golf course."
"To Mesa School District for the time that the property is used for a Lehi school."
"To A on the condition that A is married, but if A should ever divorce, the grantor may enter
and possess the property."
"To A subject to the condition that no dancing ever occur on the property."
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part, except for use as
permitted in a license distributed with a certain product or service or otherwise on a password-protected website or school-approved learning
management system for classroom use.
- 11 -
"To A provided that the premises are always used for a Lutheran church."
NOTE: Be certain the students understand that the distinction between a fee simple determinable and a fee simple
subject to a condition subsequent is that the fee simple determinable automatically terminates upon violation
of the use restriction. A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent terminates only if the grantor re-enters
and takes the property back (generally through a quiet title action). The determination is based on the
choice of language; a reflection of the parties' intent.
a. Future interest that goes with a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent
b. Grantor's future interest
c. Creation – "To the city of Minneapolis on the condition that the land be used for a city park,
and should the land ever be used for another purpose, I reserve the right to re-enter and take
possession of and title to the property."
d. Different from the possibility of reverter in that the grantor must take action to obtain
possessory rights of the future interest whereas the possibility of reverter is automatically
vested in the grantor at the time of the restriction violation
e. Grantor can make inter vivos transfer or transfer by will
f. Some states have restrictions similar to those noted under the possibility of reverter
g. Distinctions between possibility of reverter and right of entry or power of termination
FACTS: Congress enacted the Trails Act to preserve shrinking rail trackage by converting unused rights-of-
way to recreational trails. The railroads were granted rights-of-way (easements – see Chapter 5) with
the following language in the conveyance:
[Grantor] does hereby remise, release, and forever quit claim unto the SEABOARD AIR
LINE RAILWAY ... a right of way for railroad purposes over and across the following
described parcels of land....
This conveyance is made upon the express condition, however that if the Seaboard Air Line
Railway shall not construct upon said land and commence the operation thereon [within]
one year of the date hereof of a line of railroad, or, if at any time thereafter the said Seaboard
Air Line Railway shall abandon said land for railroad purposes then the above described
pieces and parcels of land shall [ipso facto] revert to and again become the property of the
undersigned, his heirs, administrators and assigns.
Several landowners (plaintiffs) brought suit challenging the federal government’s rails-to-trails
program on the grounds that it was an uncompensated taking of their property.
DECISION: The landowners owned the easement because the interest reverted back to them when the
railroads ceased operations. They had full fee simple title and for the federal government to
convert the rails to trails was a taking of their property. The court held that the property owners are
entitled to compensation because of the taking of their property for trails.
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part, except for use as
permitted in a license distributed with a certain product or service or otherwise on a password-protected website or school-approved learning
management system for classroom use.
- 12 -
ANSWERS TO CASE QUESTIONS:
1. What type of land interest was granted for the railroad easement? The grant was a fee simple
determinable, with a possibility of reverter in the grantor if the railroad use discontinued.
2. What happened to title to the easement when the railroads quit using the rights-of-way for railroad use?
Because it was a fee simple determinable, the full fee simple interest was back in the grantor because the
future interest of a possibility of reverter merged with the original title. They owned the property free and
clear of the railroad easement.
3. What advice could you give to landowners who have limited use easements that they have granted to
others? They need to be checking on how and when the easement is used and then understand their
rights if the use stops (abandonment) or the use changes. If either happens, then they have full title to the
property.
The court found for the Ator heir. Below is the court’s explanation:
It is undisputed that by operation of the 1954 Warranty Deed, Thelma Ator conveyed to School District a
determinable fee simple in the Subject Land and retained a transferable possibility of reverter. A
determinable fee simple, also known as a determinable fee upon conditional limitation, “is a fee simple
except that it is immediately terminated by the happening of some possible event, subsequently. The estate
remaining in the grantor after the conveyance of such an estate is a possibility of reverter which he may
convey, it being considered an interest in the land.” In contrast, a fee simple subject to condition subsequent
“may be terminated by the grantor by re-entry upon the happening of some possible event, subsequently.
What remains to the grantor after the conveyance of such an estate is a power [of re-entry] ... which is not
an interest in the land and is not sufficiently in esse to be subject of conveyance.” Breach of a conditional
limitation triggers automatic reversion of land, whereas breach of a condition subsequent results in forfeiture.
The question before us is one of contract interpretation − whether a condition has occurred within the meaning
of the 1954 Agreement and Warranty Deed triggering automatic reversion of the Subject Property to Plaintiff
Ator.
School District argues the “spirit” of the Agreement was to benefit children by promoting football and providing
School District with land on which students could practice and play the game. School District insists
these objectives currently are being met by its use of the Subject Property for eighth and ninth-grade football
practices as well as for FOR practices and games. School District points out that none of these goals
would be advanced if Plaintiff Ator assumed control of the Subject Property, demolished the stadium, and
prevented children from playing football there. School District notes the 1954 Agreement contains five express
references to “the students” of School District, but no references to the high school, its varsity football
team, or to the age or grade level of football players. School District maintains FOR football games are played
“in the manner and form generally employed by high schools” as required by the Agreement.
Plaintiff Ator counters there is no evidence Thelma Ator intended to donate the land for the promotion of
football in general. Rather, the express language of the conveyance indicates she hoped to correct School
District's inability to “institute and conduct in its school system a fully organized and regularly scheduled
program of football training and football games” by giving it property on which to “own or maintain a football
field, stadium or other facility for the use of the students of said school district in the practice and playing of
football.” He stresses it was School District's choice to build a new stadium on separate property rather than
renovate and expand the facilities on the Subject Property in keeping with its contractual obligations under
the 1954 Agreement and Warranty Deed. Plaintiff Ator argues School District cannot rely on FOR's use of
the Subject Property to bootstrap itself into alleged compliance with the terms of the conditional grant.
We agree with Plaintiff Ator. The plain language of the 1954 Agreement and Warranty Deed indicates that
Thelma Ator intended for School District, not any other entity, to (1) maintain “upon said property a fully
organized football program;” (2) use the Subject Property “for the playing of a complete program of regularly
scheduled football games and contests during each school year,” and (3) “maintain a regularly organized
football program upon said property comparable in quality and standards to similar programs maintained in
other communities of like size.” It is undisputed none of School District's football teams have played any
football games at Ator Field since 2001. The plain fact is School District no longer maintains upon the
Subject Property a fully organized football program of regularly scheduled football games as required by the
1954 Agreement and Warranty Deed. We agree with the trial court that School District cannot rely on FOR
© 2017 Cengage Learning®. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part, except for use as
permitted in a license distributed with a certain product or service or otherwise on a password-protected website or school-approved learning
management system for classroom use.
- 13 -
Another document from Scribd.com that is
random and unrelated content:
derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project
Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the
Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic
works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with
the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this
agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full
Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with
others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the
laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™
work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the
copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which
the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase
“Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed,
viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other
than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form.
Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License
as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you
comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access
to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be
paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or
are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.F.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date
contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official
page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.