1. (O): 1st QUESTION: RECAP
Edith’s Interest
Majority: E has F.S. Determinable
Some: E has Life Estate Determinable
Gloria holds future interest through residuary clause

2. (O): 2d QUESTION: Recap
Is condition restraining 2d marriage void as against public policy?
Policy Discussion: A’s right to control property v. E’s right to control her life
Maybe more likely OK if just life estate for support

3. (O): 2d QUESTION
Is condition restraining 2d marriage void as against public policy? Result:
If not void, nothing changes
If void, pencil out condition

4. (O): 2d QUESTION If condition void, pencil out condition
“To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.”

5. If condition void, pencil out condition
(O): 2d QUESTION
If condition void, pencil out condition
“To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit.”
Majority: E = Fee Simple Absolute
Some: E = Life Estate + G = Reversion

6. (O): 2d QUESTION
If condition void, pencil out condition: “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit.” Edith Dies?
Majority: E = Fee Simple Absolute 
S= Fee Simple Absolute

7. (O): 2d QUESTION
If condition void, pencil out condition: “To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit.” Edith Dies?
Some: E = Life Estate + G = Reversion 
G = Fee Simple Absolute

8. (O): 3d QUESTION: ARGUMENTS?
Is cohabitation a violation of a restraint on marriage?

9. (O): 3d QUESTION
Is cohabitation a violation of a restraint on marriage?
If yes, Gloria gets fee simple absolute.
If no (Restatement position) nothing changes

10. (O): E Dies, Condition Valid, No Violation
“To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.”
Some: E = Life Estate Determinable G = Possibility of Reverter +Reversion = Reversion (Merger)
Who Gets?

11. (O): E Dies, Condition Valid, No Violation
“To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.”
Some: E = Life Estate Determinable G = Possibility of Reverter +Reversion = Reversion (Merger)
G = Fee Simple Absolute

12. (O): E Dies, Condition Valid, No Violation
“To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.”
Majority: E = Fee Simple Determinable G = Possibility of Reverter
Who Gets?

13. (O): E Dies, Condition Valid, No Violation
“To my wife Edith, for her use & benefit, so long as she remains unmarried.”
Majority: E = Fee Simple Determinable G = Possibility of Reverter
S = Fee Simple Absolute (Condition Can Never Occur)

14. Shapira v. Union National Bank
POINCIANAS: DQS

15. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Gift conditioned upon religious faith of beneficiary
v. Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of particular faith

16. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Gift conditioned upon religious faith of beneficiary v. Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of particular faith
Belief v. Conduct (Marriage in 1974)
Administrability

17. ADMINISTRABILITY
To Pigpen, so long as the kitchens and bathrooms are always kept very clean.
To Schroeder, so long as he never plays any work by Beethoven on the piano.

18. ADMINISTRABILITY
To Lucy so long as she remains a member of the Society of Friends
To Linus, so long as he remains a good Catholic

19. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Gift conditioned upon divorce
v. Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of particular faith

20. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Gift conditioned upon divorce
v. Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of particular faith
Ct: Latter not sufficient to encourage fake M & divorce
Grantee can’t avoid condition by saying “I will act in bad faith”

21. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Conditional gift with “gift over” to third party
v. Conditional gift without “gift over”

22. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Conditional gift with “gift over” to third party
v. Conditional gift without “gift over”
Comprehensive plan
v. “In Terrorem” condition

23. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Forcing a marriage as condition of completed gift
v. Withholding gift until marriage made

24. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Forcing a marriage as condition of completed gift
v. Withholding gift until marriage made
Remedy: Injunction v. Forfeiting Gift
Like case involving divorce settlement requirement that child be raised in partic. faith: Won’t impose contempt/crim sanctions for not following religion

25. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Quaker men (Maddox)
v. Jewish women (Shapira)

26. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS
Quaker men (Maddox)
v. Jewish women (Shapira)
Too Few Available Partners
E.g., you must marry one of the Bronte Sisters

27. DQ106. Maddox rules that these kinds of conditions are unacceptable where there is a sufficiently “small number of eligible” partners. How few partners must there be to meet the test?

28. DQ106. Maddox: unacceptable where there is a sufficiently “small number of eligible” partners. If you were living in a state with that test, how would you prove it was met?

29. DQ106. Was the Maddox opinion cited in Shapira correct to rule that these kinds of conditions are unacceptable where there is a sufficiently “small number of eligible” partners?

30. DQ106. Was Maddox correct to rule that these kinds of conditions are unacceptable where there is a sufficiently “small number of eligible” partners? Too much restriction on grantee v. Grantor’s rights

31. DQ107: Should a court enforce conditions that limit or mandate religious behavior for the grantee?

32. DQ104. Why should we allow grantors to have any control at all of what happens to land after they have died? Maybe allow life estates & vested remainders but no conditions on use?

33. TIMING AMBIGUITY
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Cheryl graduates from law school, then to Cheryl.
If Cheryl graduates from law school during Andrew’s life estate, does she divest Andrew’s interest or just Brian’s?

34. TIMING AMBIGUITY
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Cheryl graduates from law school, then to Cheryl.
Common law presumption: If ambiguous, interest won’t divest life estate

35. TIMING AMBIGUITY
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Cheryl graduates from law school, then to Cheryl.
Now generally treated as a question of grantor’s intent.

36. TIMING AMBIGUITY
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Cheryl graduates from law school, to Cheryl.
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Cheryl has graduated from law school, then to Cheryl.

37. TIMING AMBIGUITY
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Cheryl graduates from law school, to Cheryl.
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Cheryl has graduated from law school, then to Cheryl.
Verb Tenses suggest immediate for first; at end of life estate for second.

38. TIMING AMBIGUITY
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Cheryl graduates from law school, then to Cheryl.
Andrew is 16; Cheryl is 46.

39. TIMING AMBIGUITY
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Cheryl graduates from law school, then to Cheryl.
Andrew is 16; Cheryl is 46.
Seems unlikely Cheryl will survive Andrew, so this suggests immediate divestment (or no point to grant).

40. TIMING AMBIGUITY
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Andrew graduates from law school, then to Cheryl.
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Brian graduates from law school, then to Cheryl.

41. TIMING AMBIGUITY
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Andrew graduates from law school, then to Cheryl.
To Andrew for life, then to Brian, but if Brian graduates from law school, then to Cheryl.
No clear reason to punish Andrew for Brian’s life choices.

42. FINAL TEST NOTES: SUBSTANCE
Lot of Repetition or Alteration of Old Qs
Read Carefully
Positives & Negatives
Changes from Old Qs
Arguments Supporting
Must be correct
Must logically support position

43. FINAL TEST NOTES: LOGISTICS
Office Hours on Course Page
All Contact Stops 6 p.m. Sunday
Room Assignments on Course Page
Reuse Midterm Blind Grading Number
Test Starts at 8:00; Arrive 15+ Minutes Early
Bring Number 2 Pencils

44. FINAL TEST NOTES: EMERGENCIES
If something occurs that prevents you from taking test on time: Talk to Deans of Students, NOT ME
If a problem arises in exam room: Talk to Registrar or Deans of Students, NOT ME