Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
An indefeasibly vested remainder is certain to become possessory in the future, and cannot be divested. [4]For example A conveys to "B for life, then to C and C 's heirs." C has an indefeasibly vested remainder, certain to become possessory upon termination of B 's life estate (when B dies).
A future interest is absolutely (or indefeasibly) vested if its beneficiary must (legally) eventually take possessory ownership. A future interest is vested subject to divestment if something could occur that would divest the remainder of an interest. For example, "From O to A for life, then to B, but if A stops growing corn, then to C": B ...
The rule converted the contingent remainder in B's heirs into a vested remainder in B. The rule's effect ended there. After that, the doctrine of merger operated on the two successive freehold estates placed in the same purchaser (B's life estate and B's remainder in fee simple) and converted them into a single fee simple absolute in B.
The rule against perpetuities serves a number of purposes. First, English courts have long recognized that allowing owners to attach long-lasting contingencies to their property harms the ability of future generations to freely buy and sell the property, since few people would be willing to buy property that had unresolved issues regarding its ownership hanging over it.
The remainder interest is vested because Beulah is mortal; her death is certain to happen. But, since Caleb and Dinah are already Adam's apparent heirs, their interest under the laws of descent is "worthier" than the interest they take under the instrument, and the deed is construed as if Adam had stopped with "to Beulah for life."
The vested rights doctrine is the rule of zoning law by which an owner or developer is entitled to proceed in accordance with the prior zoning provision where there has been a substantial change of position, expenditures, or incurrence of obligations made in good faith by an innocent party under a building permit or in reliance upon the ...
McArthur v. Scott, 113 U.S. 340 (1885), regarded a suit brought to contest a will which directed land to be conveyed to or divided among remaindermen at the expiration of a particular estate, are to be presumed, unless clearly controlled by other provisions, to relate to the beginning of enjoyment by remaindermen, and not to the vesting of the title in them.
A remainderman is a person who inherits or is entitled to inherit property upon the termination of the estate of the former owner. [1] Usually, this occurs due to the death or termination of the former owner's life estate, but this can also occur due to a specific notation in a trust passing ownership from one person to another.