Tactics for understanding future interests in Property?

[Adqueen]

Has anyone out there figured out a way to parse future interests? I'm struggling specifically with the difference between the condition subsequent that marks a vested remainder subject to divestment, and condition precedent that defines a contingent remainder subject to condition precedent. What makes a condition precedent and not subsequent?  It's inexplicable, I tell you.  Any help would be appreciated.

[gusrip98]

look at the plain words and where they come in sequence to the conveyance

"but if" usually signals that it is a condition subsequent

Is there some condition that the remainderman has to meet before the interest becomes vested?  Yes, then that is precedent.

Is there some condition they have to meet prior to becoming vested and is there some condition where they lose the interest if they breach it?

Yes, then you have the contingent with the condition subsequent.

[Frappe]

Has anyone out there figured out a way to parse future interests? I'm struggling specifically with the difference between the condition subsequent that marks a vested remainder subject to divestment, and condition precedent that defines a contingent remainder subject to condition precedent. What makes a condition precedent and not subsequent?  It's inexplicable, I tell you.  Any help would be appreciated.

Condition precedent- something that has to happen before the person can have a vested interest (ex. "if B reaches age 16, then to B") Notice B has contingent remainder (because of the condition precedent "if B reaches age 16") until he turns 16.

Condition subsequent- is where something has to happen to defease (take away) the interest. (ex. "To B, unless B marries C.") Notice here B is getting a vested remainder subject to a condition subsequent. The CS is if B ever marries C then the interest is taken away.

I always ask:
Is it going to an unaccertainable person (ex. unborn children or something like "to A's heirs" but A is still alive so the heirs are therefore unaccertainable)  OR is there a condition precedent?
If there is either an unaccertainable person or a condition precedent, then it's a contingent remainder.

And if it's not a contingent remainder, then it's gotta be a one of the 3 types of vested remainders.   

[Adqueen]

This is all very helpful, thank you.  I think I just need to take it a little at a time; no matter how often I study it, the first time I go back to it, it looks like greek and I get overwhelmed.

[lipper]

wow - so happy im finished with first year. This book helped me get through the whole future interests nightmare last year. Its called, "Estates in Land and Future Interests" by John Makdisi and Daniel B. Bogart. It's up to the 4th edition (as of last year) and its published by Aspen. It provides a bunch of examples (around 500) of conveyances in terms of future interests. I HIGHLY recommend it. especially with somehting like future interests, where u can read what a condition subsequent is a hundred times and it wont matter if u cant identify it. Practicing, rather than reading what these things are is key to understanding them.

[Adqueen]

Yeah, a TA of mine mentioned, "you'll learn about X on the last day of class in the spring."  I got weak at the thought - an end to this first year, be still my heart.

And yes I think it is just practice pratice practice until it sinks in.  Practice makes...competent?

I'll check out that book, thanks!

[CoxlessPair]

All the previous advice is right on the money.

Things clicked for me once I figured out the "if" v. "but if" regarding contingent remainder v. a divesting condition.

My prof also hammered into us to always ask first, "who has the present possessory interest?" This will help you not make slip ups re: FSELs and springing executory interests .

Hornbooks or E&E are a great resource in just practicing the hell out of these types of problems. Only through repetition did things begin to sort themselves out.

[be10dwn]

I think Gilberts law summary on future interests is really good, and theres a little workbook published by Lexis called "a students guide to estates in land and future interests" that's pretty good.  Its in simple language, and has lots of examples.

[lawschoolmama]

I attend St Thomas and have Makdasi for Property

I met with him and he told me to memorize the following chart - I write it down as soon as I get to a test.....

Interest                 depends on...

Vested Remainder          no condition precedent

Contingent Remainder      condition precedent

Executory Limitation       Condition Subsequent

Right of Reentry          Condition Subsequent

Possibility of Reverter    Condition Subsequent

Reversion                 No condition subsequent


then I list the 3 condition subsequents in alphabetical order and match them up with their "Siamese twin" ( one of Makdasi's terms)

Executory Interest          matches with Executory Limitation

Possibility of Reverter      determinable "as long as"

Right of Reentry             condition subsequent


just follow the chart.  This method makes it much easier.

Makdasi also focuses on train drawings - the older editions of his books have it.

Everyone trashes T4 schools, but I think it is kind of ironic that the upper tier schools are using a book written by a Harvard Grad that teaches at a T4 school.....

I can't give you much help with Shelley's doctrine, doctrine of worthier title, etc.  At this point Makdasi just wants us to concentrate on the basics if we don't know them by now.

Hope this helps!

[Adqueen]

How cool to have him for a professor.  Talk about getting it from the horse's mouth!

This checklist is helpful.

Now for the next question:  Rule Against Perpetuities!  Is there a straightforward way of applying that?  It is about as intuitive as calculus from what I can tell.