Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Property Question  (Read 1018 times)

midwestern

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Property Question
« on: February 01, 2006, 06:04:06 PM »
Can someone please explain to me what on earth reversionary and nonreversionary future interests are???

shao2007

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Property Question
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2006, 06:15:00 PM »
If it's a reversion then the original grantor has a future interest that will only become a present estate at the natural termination of the prior present estate.

A reversionary interest refers to all future interests created or retained by the original grantor (possibility of reverter, right or entry, and reversion)

Nonreversionary interest, the original grantor doesn't have a future interest in what he gave away.

midwestern

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Property Question
« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2006, 07:45:27 PM »
okay, thanks...now will someone tell me why property makes me want to shove bamboo under my fingernails?

lipper

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 352
    • View Profile
Re: Property Question
« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2006, 07:49:48 PM »
i actually had the honor of interning at a firm who does this stuff. it actually aint that bad - the hard part is these are abstract concepts with no practical meaning.
check the footnotes ya'll

midwestern

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Property Question
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2006, 07:56:00 PM »
yeah, it made sense and was really interesting until all of this estates and future interest garbage...but, I guess you are right - it is so abstract (at least right now) which is why it is hard to understand...

shao2007

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Property Question
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2006, 09:12:55 PM »
A Vested Remainder Subject to Complete Defeasance sounds more like an equation than a question of law

LostMyMonkeys

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Property Question
« Reply #6 on: February 03, 2006, 03:12:07 PM »
A Vested Remainder Subject to Complete Defeasance sounds more like an equation than a question of law

I think all the future interest crap is equation based. Which I think is what makes it so effing weird for law students. By our nature, we don't do math (isn't that why we went to law school in the first place, because we couldn't do math?)

Nice ass won't get you through your whole life. When you turn 30 you better have a personality

J D

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1388
  • Lust isn't one of the 7 Deadly Sins for nothing...
    • View Profile
Re: Property Question
« Reply #7 on: February 03, 2006, 03:37:06 PM »
Actually, this is very true.  It is like arithmetic, because remember what the point of all of this is: we're dividing up the estate in fee simple absolute that the grantor starts with (usually, at least in all our examples) amongs successive owners/possessors, creating both present and future interests.  So, you should always ask: 1) how much of the estate has the grantor given away (all of it? some?  If he hasn't given all of it away, he has to retain some kind of reversionary future interest); 2) if he hasn't given it all away, what has he given away, and what has he kept?; and 3) of what he's given away, has he split that at all, and if so, how has he split it (has he created remainders following a life estate?  What kind of remainders are they?  If they're vested, has he given someone else an executory interest?).
"I never think of the future.  It comes soon enough."--Albert Einstein

fallofftheworld

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 224
  • DON'T TALK ABOUT MY WALLPAPER
    • View Profile
Re: Property Question
« Reply #8 on: March 06, 2006, 11:21:43 AM »
It is mathematics as far as logic, no further.

If you can do truth tables from middle school, you can do property conditions.

If, but if, for <condition>, excepting <condition>

It's English + basic logic.  Go over rules of inference from


I poached this from a website (http://www.luc.edu/faculty/avande1/courses/logic-174/ch2-deduction.htm):


Q = "hardworking persons"
P = "persons"
M = "cow owners that live in Kalamazoo"
C = "cow owners"
1. Some Q are M
2. All Q are P
3. All M are C
        So, some P are C
---------
4. Some Q are C
5. Some C are Q
6. Some C are P
7. Some P are C Premiss
Premiss (logical truth)
Premiss (logical truth)


1,3, Q-Chain
4, Conv
5,2, Q-Chain
6, Conv


That's what I thought of when I read properties stuff

LostMyMonkeys

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Property Question
« Reply #9 on: March 14, 2006, 11:09:02 PM »
Ya know what I thought when I read this post?

That you don't make a damn bit of sense at all.

WTF is all that crap you are spewing?

It is mathematics as far as logic, no further.

If you can do truth tables from middle school, you can do property conditions.

If, but if, for <condition>, excepting <condition>

It's English + basic logic.  Go over rules of inference from


I poached this from a website (http://www.luc.edu/faculty/avande1/courses/logic-174/ch2-deduction.htm):


Q = "hardworking persons"
P = "persons"
M = "cow owners that live in Kalamazoo"
C = "cow owners"
1. Some Q are M
2. All Q are P
3. All M are C
        So, some P are C
---------
4. Some Q are C
5. Some C are Q
6. Some C are P
7. Some P are C Premiss
Premiss (logical truth)
Premiss (logical truth)


1,3, Q-Chain
4, Conv
5,2, Q-Chain
6, Conv


That's what I thought of when I read properties stuff
Nice ass won't get you through your whole life. When you turn 30 you better have a personality