US — Property — Quiz 1
US property law — acquisition, estates and future interests, concurrent ownership, and conveyancing.
- 1.
A testator devises Blackacre 'to Alice for life, then to Alice's children who survive her, and if no child of Alice survives her, to Bob and his heirs.' At the time of the devise, Alice has one living child, Carol. Which of the following correctly describes the interests created?
- 2.
A grantor conveys land 'to the Hillside School so long as the premises are used for educational purposes, and if they ever cease to be so used, to the City of Greenport.' The school later converts the land to commercial use. Which party has the right to possession?
- 3.
In 1990 a testator devises property 'to my daughter Dana for life, then to Dana's first child to reach age 25.' Dana is alive and has no children at the testator's death. The jurisdiction applies the common-law Rule Against Perpetuities. Is the remainder valid?
- 4.
Owen and Petra own Blackacre as joint tenants. Owen executes and records a mortgage on his undivided half-interest to Bank to secure a personal loan, without Petra's knowledge. Owen later dies while the mortgage is still outstanding. In a title-theory mortgage jurisdiction, what is the effect on the joint tenancy?
- 5.
Landlord leases an apartment to Tenant for two years at $1,500/month. After one year, Tenant moves out and stops paying rent without Landlord's consent. Landlord, following the modern majority rule on mitigation, takes no steps to re-let the unit for the remaining year. Tenant argues Landlord had a duty to mitigate. Under the modern majority approach, what is Landlord's recovery?
- 6.
Alice owns Whiteacre. She grants Neighbor an express easement 'to use the footpath across Whiteacre to reach the public road' recorded in the county deed records. Alice later sells Whiteacre to Buyer, who takes with actual notice of the easement. Buyer blocks the path, arguing the easement is personal to Neighbor. Is the easement enforceable against Buyer?
- 7.
In 1985, a developer creates a residential subdivision and records a declaration imposing a restriction that 'no lot shall be used for commercial purposes.' All deeds reference the declaration. Owner buys Lot 10 in 1990. In 2010, the developer's successor purports to release the restriction on Lot 10 by recorded instrument. Other lot owners sue to enforce the restriction against Lot 10's commercial use. What is the most likely outcome?
- 8.
In a race-notice recording act jurisdiction, Owner conveys Greenacre to Alice by deed, which Alice does not record. Owner then conveys the same Greenacre to Bob, who has no knowledge of Alice's deed. Bob records immediately. Alice then records. Bob later conveys to Carol, who searches the records, finds only Bob's chain of title, and pays fair value. Who has title?
- 9.
Paula enters Neighbor's unenclosed, unposted rural land in 1998 and begins farming a three-acre parcel. She farms openly, continuously, and exclusively until 2023, when Neighbor demands she leave. The state's adverse possession statute requires 20 years of actual, open, notorious, hostile, and exclusive possession. Paula's farming use is consistent with how the land would normally be used. Does Paula have a claim?
- 10.
A testator devises Blackacre 'to my son Sam for life, remainder to such of Sam's children as shall be living at Sam's death.' Sam has two living children, Tom and Uma, at the testator's death. Applying the Rule Against Perpetuities, is the remainder valid?
- 11.
Tara owns a commercial building and leases it to Dan for five years. Eighteen months into the lease, Dan assigns the lease to Eve, who assumes all obligations. With two years left on the term, Eve stops paying rent. Tara sues both Dan and Eve. Which of the following correctly states the liability of each party?
Questions & answers
1. A testator devises Blackacre 'to Alice for life, then to Alice's children who survive her, and if no child of Alice survives her, to Bob and his heirs.' At the time of the devise, Alice has one living child, Carol. Which of the following correctly describes the interests created?
Answer: Alice has a life estate; the children of Alice have a contingent remainder; Bob has an alternative contingent remainder.
The children's remainder is contingent because it is conditioned on surviving Alice, a condition precedent not yet satisfied. Bob's remainder is the alternative contingent remainder that takes if the condition fails. Option A is wrong because a remainder whose takers must survive cannot be 'vested subject to open'—survivorship is a condition precedent, not a condition of partial defeasance. Options B and E misclassify Carol's interest; D misidentifies Alice's estate.
2. A grantor conveys land 'to the Hillside School so long as the premises are used for educational purposes, and if they ever cease to be so used, to the City of Greenport.' The school later converts the land to commercial use. Which party has the right to possession?
Answer: The City of Greenport, because the grant of a future interest to a third party following durational language creates a fee simple subject to an executory limitation, and the executory interest cuts short the school's estate upon breach.
When durational language ('so long as') is paired with a future interest in a third party rather than the grantor, the estate is a fee simple subject to an executory limitation, and the third party holds a shifting executory interest that automatically divests the grantee upon the specified event. The City's interest is valid because the triggering event (cessation of educational use) must occur, if at all, when the school ceases use—which will certainly happen within a life in being or not at all, satisfying the RAP. Option A is wrong because the future interest runs to a third party, not the grantor; C states an outdated common-law position not universally followed and ignores the executory interest; D incorrectly applies the RAP; E confuses adverse possession with the operation of a defeasible fee.