great lecture! Many thanks for sharing it with the public. I think I get the terminologies. The part I could not wrap my mind around is what are some usages of a fee simple defeasible title? As you mentioned in the previous video, most of the real estate being transacted has fee simple absolute.
In modern commercial law practice, there really are not many situations in which lawyers use fee simple defeasibles. The reason is that most people receiving title don't want it taken away from them, even if they violate some condition or promise they have made. Occasionally a FSD will be used when land is conveyed for charitable or environmental purposes, but these are specialized cases.
On the opinion part, is it possible that a person having a right of entry but only finding out about the triggering event long after the time that would normally give title to the possessor by adverse possession could nevertheless exercise the right of entry and oust the possessor? I'm assuming that's a danger, or else what difference would the order of preference matter? That actually makes the title *more precarious with the condition subsequent (because the limit only runs from the time the person finding out about the triggering event finds out about the triggering event, whereas adverse possession has no such requirement).
John, you're absolutely right. The risk of an exercise long after the creation of the right is somewhat mitigated by the fact that some courts will say that the holder of a right of entry must exercise it within a reasonable time of learning that the condition has been violated. See, e.g., Martin v. City of Seattle, 111 Wash. 2d 727, 765 P.2d 257 (1988). However, it's still entirely possible for a breach of the condition to occur in circumstances in which the holder of the right of entry doesn't have any notice of the breach. The result is that the right of entry might be legally exercisable many years after the breach occurs. A few states have statutes that simply terminate the right of entry so many years after its creation, unless the holder of the right of entry re-records it in the public records. See, e.g., Iowa Code Ann. 614.24 (21 years). That's also helpful, but not very many states have such statutes.
Hi, you said in the executory interest video that if the deed doesn't say life estate, you can not assume that it is one. In this video you do so at approximately 3 minutes?
Deirdre - Sure I did. But the material at 3:00 is talking about the English common law, which did assume that "To A" gave A only a life estate, while modern American law assumes that a deed "to A" gives A a fee simple absolute (assuming that the grantor has one to give. So today we should never assume that a deed gives only a life estate unless it so specifies.
Zeb - a fee simple may be absolute or defeasible. You have to read the accompanying language to see if there are any words that make it defeasible. If there are none, it's absolute. Either way, it is subject to property taxes, assessed by local governments (usually city or county, or both, plus school districts and other special districts). The fact that it is held in fee simple absolute doesn't exempt it from taxes.
If a Corporation Creates a Fee Simple Defeasible Estate can the descendants of the families of the Corporate Officers dissolve the Estate 80 years later? Do you have to have ALL descendants sign off on it? If some descendants deny the Estate can't the remaining descendants divide it up?
I'm not sure what you're asking. What do you mean by "dissolving" the estate? You said that the corporation created the fee simple defeasible, but it's not clear to whom (or to what entity) the estate was originally conveyed. Is the corporation still in existence? If so, it presumably still holds the future interest that follows the defeasible fee. If the corporation has been dissolved, ordinarily its shareholders would have had the assets (including the future interest) distributed to them. If these shareholders, or some of them, have subsequently died, then you would need to trace the title to the future interest to the heirs or devisees of the original shareholders. Well, I think I have said enough to give you some idea of the factual issues that need to be clarified before anyone can address the situation.
@@fredmertzful OK here are some more details. Corporation A donates land to City to create a golf course. There is a paragraph stating "If use of property as a golf course is abandoned, the title to said land hereby conveyed shall revert to and reinvest in the party of the first part." Party of first part = Corporation A. That was in 1935. Sometime in the next few years after that the corporation was liquidated/dissolved. Golf course continued until 1999 when Person C came along and offered to buy the golf course from the City. The City accepted. At the time of the sale the City includes more verbiage that says the property has to be used as a golf course or the property will revert back to the City. In 2015 Person C decides he wants to sell golf course. He is going to hold an auction. He tells city he can't sell the Course with this awful restriction and he gets the City to Cancel the Second Reversion Clause. But the cancellation of the clause is only applicable to the upcoming auction. And as far as I can tell some of the descendants from the officers of Corporation A also signed something in 2015 around the time of the auction saying no more conversion clause. SO then after all this Person C sells to LLC D. LLC D defaults on a loan they took out a year later on the property. Lender E forecloses and gets the property back. Person ME, as in myself, bought the course from Lender E and Sold it to Person F. A little less than a year ago Person F closed the course adversely affecting the area. I am working with some other people from around the area to try and get the property back and create a park/wildlife corridor, etc. I hope that has not confused you to much. I really liked your videos they are very helpful !! My email is casitas at swcp dot com.
great lecture! Many thanks for sharing it with the public. I think I get the terminologies. The part I could not wrap my mind around is what are some usages of a fee simple defeasible title? As you mentioned in the previous video, most of the real estate being transacted has fee simple absolute.
In modern commercial law practice, there really are not many situations in which lawyers use fee simple defeasibles. The reason is that most people receiving title don't want it taken away from them, even if they violate some condition or promise they have made. Occasionally a FSD will be used when land is conveyed for charitable or environmental purposes, but these are specialized cases.
On the opinion part, is it possible that a person having a right of entry but only finding out about the triggering event long after the time that would normally give title to the possessor by adverse possession could nevertheless exercise the right of entry and oust the possessor? I'm assuming that's a danger, or else what difference would the order of preference matter? That actually makes the title *more precarious with the condition subsequent (because the limit only runs from the time the person finding out about the triggering event finds out about the triggering event, whereas adverse possession has no such requirement).
John, you're absolutely right. The risk of an exercise long after the creation of the right is somewhat mitigated by the fact that some courts will say that the holder of a right of entry must exercise it within a reasonable time of learning that the condition has been violated. See, e.g., Martin v. City of Seattle, 111 Wash. 2d 727, 765 P.2d 257 (1988). However, it's still entirely possible for a breach of the condition to occur in circumstances in which the holder of the right of entry doesn't have any notice of the breach. The result is that the right of entry might be legally exercisable many years after the breach occurs. A few states have statutes that simply terminate the right of entry so many years after its creation, unless the holder of the right of entry re-records it in the public records. See, e.g., Iowa Code Ann. 614.24 (21 years). That's also helpful, but not very many states have such statutes.
Hi, you said in the executory interest video that if the deed doesn't say life estate, you can not assume that it is one. In this video you do so at approximately 3 minutes?
Deirdre - Sure I did. But the material at 3:00 is talking about the English common law, which did assume that "To A" gave A only a life estate, while modern American law assumes that a deed "to A" gives A a fee simple absolute (assuming that the grantor has one to give. So today we should never assume that a deed gives only a life estate unless it so specifies.
@@fredmertzful Thank you for responding. I will listen to it again and see if I missed that.
If the title is Fee Simple, which is Fee Simple Absolute... then taxes don’t apply, correct?
Zeb - a fee simple may be absolute or defeasible. You have to read the accompanying language to see if there are any words that make it defeasible. If there are none, it's absolute. Either way, it is subject to property taxes, assessed by local governments (usually city or county, or both, plus school districts and other special districts). The fact that it is held in fee simple absolute doesn't exempt it from taxes.
If a Corporation Creates a Fee Simple Defeasible Estate can the descendants of the families of the Corporate Officers dissolve the Estate 80 years later? Do you have to have ALL descendants sign off on it? If some descendants deny the Estate can't the remaining descendants divide it up?
I'm not sure what you're asking. What do you mean by "dissolving" the estate? You said that the corporation created the fee simple defeasible, but it's not clear to whom (or to what entity) the estate was originally conveyed. Is the corporation still in existence? If so, it presumably still holds the future interest that follows the defeasible fee. If the corporation has been dissolved, ordinarily its shareholders would have had the assets (including the future interest) distributed to them. If these shareholders, or some of them, have subsequently died, then you would need to trace the title to the future interest to the heirs or devisees of the original shareholders. Well, I think I have said enough to give you some idea of the factual issues that need to be clarified before anyone can address the situation.
@@fredmertzful OK here are some more details. Corporation A donates land to City to create a golf course. There is a paragraph stating "If use of property as a golf course is abandoned, the title to said land hereby conveyed shall revert to and reinvest in the party of the first part." Party of first part = Corporation A. That was in 1935. Sometime in the next few years after that the corporation was liquidated/dissolved. Golf course continued until 1999 when Person C came along and offered to buy the golf course from the City. The City accepted. At the time of the sale the City includes more verbiage that says the property has to be used as a golf course or the property will revert back to the City. In 2015 Person C decides he wants to sell golf course. He is going to hold an auction. He tells city he can't sell the Course with this awful restriction and he gets the City to Cancel the Second Reversion Clause. But the cancellation of the clause is only applicable to the upcoming auction. And as far as I can tell some of the descendants from the officers of Corporation A also signed something in 2015 around the time of the auction saying no more conversion clause. SO then after all this Person C sells to LLC D. LLC D defaults on a loan they took out a year later on the property. Lender E forecloses and gets the property back. Person ME, as in myself, bought the course from Lender E and Sold it to Person F. A little less than a year ago Person F closed the course adversely affecting the area. I am working with some other people from around the area to try and get the property back and create a park/wildlife corridor, etc. I hope that has not confused you to much. I really liked your videos they are very helpful !! My email is casitas at swcp dot com.