Poor Prof. Property

Before beginning her homily on vested and contingent remainders, she asked the class to bear with her and avoid asking questions.

She posed this basic hypothetical: “A conveys Blackacre to B for life, then to C’s children”

Since we weren’t allowed to ask in class, here is a highly abbreviated list of the somewhat appropriate questions, I heard students asking each other in the hall:

1) “What if C was a surrogate mother?”
2) “What if C conceived a child that died a week before birth?”
3) “What if C had a child that died one week after birth but before B died?”
4) “What if B dies while C has no kids and a month later C discovers he has a son from a one night stand 15 years prior?”
5) “If the hypothetical used the word “kids” rather than “children”, would baby goats apply?”

Those are just some of the real questions asked by real students. The goat question is proof of that. I certainly wouldn’t have known a baby goat was called a kid unless Mark . . . umm I mean, someone else mentioned it.

So good call on the no questions in class, but seriously I’m kind of curious about number 4.

And in case you were wondering the answer to the primary hypo:
If C has no children when the initial transaction occurs, C’s not-yet-existent children have a contingent remainder in fee simple absolute, while A has a reversion in fee simple absolute.

If C has a kid named D, D gets a vested remainder subject to open in fee simple absolute and when B dies, D is riding dirty with his fee simple absolute.

And to help you remember today’s lesson:

“Property 9 – 27 – 06”

Any time you have
A contingent remainder;
Reversion in O.