DOCSLIB.ORG

Ownership Estates)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ownership Estates) Rights of Ownership: Freeholds (Ownership Estates) LEARNING OBJECTIVES Upon completion of this section, the student should be able to: • Describe the two types of estates in land. • Define and give examples of fee simple estates: fee simple absolute, fee simple defeasible, fee simple with a special limitation (determinable fee), and fee simple subject to a condition subsequent. • Define a life estate and differentiate between a conventional life estate and a legal life estate, citing examples of each. • Define and differentiate between remainder and reversionary interests. VOCABULARY What is an estate? • Identifies the amount, length, and restrictions of an owner’s interest in real property. Freehold Estate Major Types 1. Fee Simple 2. Life Estate Freehold Estate Fee Life Simple Estate ABC Real Estate School 3st ed National Workbook August 2010 Page 38 Freehold Estate A buyer is purchasing a property. What are his ownership limitations? How long can he own the property? Is there a deeded use that is off limits (maybe using the property for a tavern)? Is there a use that must continue (maybe conservation…not buildable)? Can his heirs inherit the property or is there a pre- determined ownership upon his death? These questions are all answered upon inspection of the type of freehold estate. The type of estate identifies the amount, length, and restrictions of an owner’s interest in real property. There are 2 major types of freehold estates: (1) fee simple estate and (2) life estate. There are multiple subtypes under these major types. Fee Simple Freehold Estate Fee Simple Freehold Estate Fee Simple Fee Simple Absolute Defeasible Determinable Limitation Condition Subsequent There are 2 types of fee simple freehold estates and they are very different. Because a fee simple absolute is the most common type of fee simple freehold estate and a fee simple defeasible is rare, sometimes people forget that there is a defeasible or defeatable type of fee simple freehold estate and they use the terms fee simple and fee simple absolute interchangeably; but on the real estate exam, questions will distinguish between the 2 types. Fee Simple Absolute A fee simple absolute freehold estate is the most complete private ownership interest that can be held in real property. Fee simple ownership ABC Real Estate School 3st ed National Workbook August 2010 Page 39 represents absolute ownership of real property but as always is limited by basic government powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, escheat, and any other recorded deed restrictions. The owner is entitled to all legal rights to the property, including use of the property forever, and the right to will the property to designated heirs. Fee Simple Defeasible A fee simple defeasible freehold estate is ‘defeatable’. In other words ownership can be terminated if the owner fails to properly use the property. Ownership has its limits. “A defeasible estate is created when a grantor transfers land conditionally. Upon the happening of the event or condition stated by the grantor, the transfer may be void or at least subject to annulment. (An estate not subject to such conditions is called an indefeasible estate.) Historically, the common law has frowned on the use of defeasible estates as it interferes with the owners' enjoyment of their property and as such has made it difficult to create a valid future interest. Unless a defeasible estate is clearly intended, modern courts will construe the language against this type of estate. Three types of defeasible estates are the fee simple determinable, fee simple subject to an executory limitation or interest, and the fee simple subject to a condition subsequent. Because a defeasible estate always grants less than a full fee simple, a defeasible estate will always create one or more future interests. Fee simple determinable A fee simple determinable is an estate that will end automatically if the stated condition occurs. The interest will revert to the grantor or the heirs of the grantor. A possibility of reverter follows a fees simple determinable. Durational language such as "to A as long as the property is used for a park" creates a fee simple determinable and a possibility of reverter. Fee simple subject to a limitation A fee simple subject to a limitation is an estate that ends when a specific condition is met and then transfers to a third party. The interest will not revert to the grantor. If the condition is met, the grantee loses the interest and the third party gains it automatically. ABC Real Estate School 3st ed National Workbook August 2010 Page 40 Example: O grants Blackacre to A and A's heir; but if A ever accepts a candy bar from C, then to B and B's heirs. Here, O is the original owner. She grants A a fee simple subject to the subsequent condition that he doesn't accept a candy bar from C. But unlike a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, Blackacre goes to a third party (B) instead of the grantor (O) if the condition is met. Also unlike a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, B then automatically gains the interest in Blackacre and does not only have a mere right to sue for re-entry. What would happen if the property were conveyed? Let's say A sold Blackacre to D. If A afterwards accepted an offer for a candy bar from C, Blackacre automatically goes to B. But if A died without ever accepting a candy bar from C, the condition could not possibly be met. D would then have a fee simple absolute. Fee simple subject to condition subsequent A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent is created when the words of a grant support the conclusion that the grantor intends to convey a fee simple absolute but has attached a condition to the grant so that if a specified future event happens the grantor will get its fee simple absolute back, provided that the grantor exercises his right of entry(or power of termination). Thus, a fee simple subject to condition subsequent does not end automatically upon the happening of the condition. The future interest is called a "right of reentry" or "right of entry," and the property only reverts back to the original grantor if he exercises this right. The right of entry is not automatic, but rather must be exercised to terminate the fee simple subject to condition subsequent. To exercise right of entry, the holder must take substantial steps to recover possession and title, for example, by filing a lawsuit. Physical entry is not required, but the holder must do more than just proclaim an intent to take back. One of the languages used to create a fee simple subject to condition subsequent and a right of entry is "to A, but if A sells alcohol on the land, then grantor has the right of entry(or power of termination). Common uses include language such as "may", "but if", "however", or "provided that..."”5 5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defeasible_estate Accessed July 8, 2010. ABC Real Estate School 3st ed National Workbook August 2010 Page 41 Fee Simple Freeholds Review A. Fee Simple Absolute 1. the highest interest in real estate recognized by law 2. holder is entitled to all legal rights to the property B. Fee simple Defeasible (Defeatable) Estate 1. a qualified estate 2. subject to the occurrence or non-occurrence of some specific event 3. 3 types: a) Determinable (1) As long as the property is used for…. b) condition subsequent (1) As long as you don’t… (2) new owner may not perform some action or activity (3) former owner retains rights if condition is violated c) special limitation (1) As long as you do or don’t….. (2) former owner reacquires full ownership if the condition is violated (3) also called a fee simple determinable Fee Simple Life Estate A life estate is a concept used to designate the ownership of land for the duration of a person's life. It is an estate in real property that ends at death. The owner of a life estate is called a "life tenant". Although the ownership of a life estate is of limited duration because it ends at the death of the person who is the "measuring life", the owner has the right to enjoy the benefits of ownership of the property, including income derived from rent or other uses of the property, during his or her possession. This life tenant may farm, lease, mortgage or sell his interest, but cannot effect the remainder. Because a life estate ceases to exist at the death of the measuring person's life, this temporary ownership agreement cannot be willed by the life tenant. At death, ownership of the property involved in a life estate either moves on to a 3rd party named by the original owner, or reverts back to the original owner. If the property moves on to a 3rd party, named the remainderman ,the new ownership is typically fee simple absolute. ABC Real Estate School 3st ed National Workbook August 2010 Page 42 A life estate could also be named "pur autre vie", or the life of another. Such a life estate can also be conveyed originally, such as "to A until B dies." For example, because Grandma Wells has Alzheimer’s, the property will be given to Grandpa Wells while he cares for Grandma until her death. Upon Grandma Wells’ death, the property ownership will change either back to the original owner or a 3rd party named in the deed. II. Life estate A. freehold estate limited in duration to the life of the owner B.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Oxford Scholarship Online
    Uses, Wills, and Fiscal Feudalism University Press Scholarship Online Oxford Scholarship Online The Oxford History of the Laws of England: Volume VI 1483–1558 John Baker Print publication date: 2003 Print ISBN-13: 9780198258179 Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: March 2012 DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198258179.001.0001 Uses, Wills, and Fiscal Feudalism Sir John Baker DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198258179.003.0035 Abstract and Keywords This chapter examines property law related to uses, wills, and fiscal feudalism in England during the Tudor period. It discusses the conflict between landlords and tenants concerning land use, feoffment, and land revenue. The prevalence of uses therefore provoked a conflict of interests which could not be reduced to a simple question of revenue evasion. This was a major problem because during this period, the greater part of the land of England was in feoffments upon trust. Keywords: fiscal feudalism, land use, feoffments, property law, tenants, wills, landlords ANOTHER prolonged discussion, culminating in a more fundamental and far-reaching reform, concerned another class of tenant altogether, the tenant by knight-service. Here the debate concerned a different aspect of feudal tenure, the valuable ‘incidents’ which belonged to the lord on the descent of such a tenancy to an heir. The lord was entitled to Page 1 of 40 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance Note
    Guidance note The Crown Estate – Escheat All general enquiries regarding escheat should be Burges Salmon LLP represents The Crown Estate in relation addressed in the first instance to property which may be subject to escheat to the Crown by email to escheat.queries@ under common law. This note is a brief explanation of this burges-salmon.com or by complex and arcane aspect of our legal system intended post to Escheats, Burges for the guidance of persons who may be affected by or Salmon LLP, One Glass Wharf, interested in such property. It is not a complete exposition Bristol BS2 0ZX. of the law nor a substitute for legal advice. Basic principles English land law has, since feudal times, vested in the joint tenants upon a trust determine the bankrupt’s interest and been based on a system of tenure. A of land. the trustee’s obligations and liabilities freeholder is not an absolute owner but • Freehold property held subject to a trust. with effect from the date of disclaimer. a“tenant in fee simple” holding, in most The property may then become subject Properties which may be subject to escheat cases, directly from the Sovereign, as lord to escheat. within England, Wales and Northern Ireland paramount of all the land in the realm. fall to be dealt with by Burges Salmon LLP • Disclaimer by liquidator Whenever a “tenancy in fee simple”comes on behalf of The Crown Estate, except for In the case of a company which is being to an end, for whatever reason, the land in properties within the County of Cornwall wound up in England and Wales, the liquidator may, by giving the prescribed question may become subject to escheat or the County Palatine of Lancaster.
    [Show full text]
  • Present Legal Estates in Fee Simple
    CHAPTER 3 Present Legal Estates in Fee Simple A. THE ENGLISH LAW T THE beginning of the thirteenth century, when the royal courts of justice were acquiring effective A control of the development of private law, the possible forms of action and their limits were uncertain. It seemed then that a new form of action could be de­ vised to fit any need which might arise. In the course of that century the courts set themselves to limiting the possible forms of action to a definite list, defining with certainty the scope of permitted actions, and so refusing relief upon states of fact which did not fall within the fixed limits of permitted forms of action. This process, of course, operated to fix and limit the classes of private rights protected by law.101 A parallel process went on with respect to interests in land. At the beginning of the thirteenth century, when alienation of land was becoming possible, it seemed that any sort of interest which ingenuity could devise might be created by apt terms in the transfer creating the interest. Perhaps the form of the gift could create interests of any specified duration, with peculiar rules for descent, with special rights not ordinarily in­ cident to ownership, or deprived of some of the ordinary incidents of ownership. As in the case of the forms of action, the courts set themselves to limiting the possible interests in land to a definite list, defining with certainty 1o1 Maitland, FoRMS OF ACTION AT CoMMON LAW 51-52 (reprint 1941). 37 38 PERPETUITIES AND OTHER RESTRAINTS the incidents of permitted interests, and refusing to en­ force provisions of a gift which would add to or subtract from the fixed incidents of the type of interest conveyed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Law of Property
    THE LAW OF PROPERTY SUPPLEMENTAL READINGS Class 14 Professor Robert T. Farley, JD/LLM PROPERTY KEYED TO DUKEMINIER/KRIER/ALEXANDER/SCHILL SIXTH EDITION Calvin Massey Professor of Law, University of California, Hastings College of the Law The Emanuel Lo,w Outlines Series /\SPEN PUBLISHERS 76 Ninth Avenue, New York, NY 10011 http://lawschool.aspenpublishers.com 29 CHAPTER 2 FREEHOLD ESTATES ChapterScope -------------------­ This chapter examines the freehold estates - the various ways in which people can own land. Here are the most important points in this chapter. ■ The various freehold estates are contemporary adaptations of medieval ideas about land owner­ ship. Past notions, even when no longer relevant, persist but ought not do so. ■ Estates are rights to present possession of land. An estate in land is a legal construct, something apart fromthe land itself. Estates are abstract, figments of our legal imagination; land is real and tangible. An estate can, and does, travel from person to person, or change its nature or duration, while the landjust sits there, spinning calmly through space. ■ The fee simple absolute is the most important estate. The feesimple absolute is what we normally think of when we think of ownership. A fee simple absolute is capable of enduringforever though, obviously, no single owner of it will last so long. ■ Other estates endure for a lesser time than forever; they are either capable of expiring sooner or will definitely do so. ■ The life estate is a right to possession forthe life of some living person, usually (but not always) the owner of the life estate. It is sure to expire because none of us lives forever.
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense of the Fee Simple Katrina M
    Notre Dame Law Review Volume 93 | Issue 1 Article 1 11-2017 In Defense of the Fee Simple Katrina M. Wyman New York University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr Part of the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation 93 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1 (2017) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Notre Dame Law Review at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Law Review by an authorized editor of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\N\NDL\93-1\NDL101.txt unknown Seq: 1 15-NOV-17 13:44 ARTICLES IN DEFENSE OF THE FEE SIMPLE Katrina M. Wyman* Prominent economically oriented legal academics are currently arguing that the fee simple, the dominant form of private landownership in the United States, is an inefficient way for society to allocate land. They maintain that the fee simple blocks transfers of land to higher value uses because it provides property owners with a perpetual monopoly. The critics propose that landown- ership be reformulated to enable private actors to forcibly purchase land from other private own- ers, similar to the way that governments can expropriate land for public uses using eminent domain. While recognizing the significance of the critique, this Article takes issue with it and defends the fee simple. The Article makes two main points in defense of the fee simple. First, addressing the critique on its own economic terms, the Article argues that the critics have not established that there is a robust economic argument for dispensing with the fee simple.
    [Show full text]
  • A Legislative Proposal to Regulate Timesharing Agreements in Iraq Al-Al
    Bangor University DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Modernising Iraq: A Legislative Proposal to Regulate Timesharing Agreements in Iraq Al-Ali, Dhurgham Award date: 2017 Awarding institution: Bangor University Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 07. Oct. 2021 Modernising Iraq: A Legislative Proposal to Regulate Timesharing Agreements in Iraq By Dhurgham Fadhil Hussein Al-Ali, LLB, LLM (Iraq) A thesis submitted to the University of Bangor, School of Law in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2017 Abstract This thesis seeks to provide the Iraqi legislature with a proposal to regulate the timesharing industry in Iraq. The aim of the primary research question of the thesis is to ascertain what features of legal regimes for timeshare are likely to provide the optimal system of a timeshare operation in any jurisdiction, from which a legislative proposal for Iraq will be suggested.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Sea Grant College Program Use of Future Interests in Land As A
    Florida Sea Grant College Program Building 803 McCarty Drive A statewide university program for P O Box 110400 Coastal Research, Education & Extension Gainesville, FL 32611-0400 U.S.A. (352) 392-5870 FAX (352) 392-5113 [email protected] www.flseagrant.org Use of Future Interests in Land as a Sea-Level Rise Adaptation Strategy in Florida By: Thomas Ruppert, Esq.1 In a 2011 paper, James Titus of the U.S. EPA spends considerable time discussing the potential for the use of defeasible estates and future interests in land as potential tools for adaptation to sea-level rise (SLR). Defeasible estates and future interests in land—such as a fee simple determinable and fee simple subject to a condition subsequent—offer many potential strengths as tools for adaptation to SLR. As Titus indicates, for example, a fee simple determinable would allow a developer (D) to grant land to a buyer (B) “for so long as B does not attempt to armor the shoreline.” D thus has a possibility of reverter should B seek to protect B’s property from SLR via use of armoring. In theory this is an excellent idea as it would allow maximum use of land and would only impact B once SLR or erosion reaches a point that construction on the land is at the water-land interface and negatively impacting the coastal system—one of the harms that regulation often seeks to avoid. In reality in Florida, the situation presents more difficulties. Titus’ discussion mostly involves a generalized version of the common law of property.
    [Show full text]
  • Conveyancing at a Crossroads
    CONVEYANCING AT A CROSSROADS: THE TRANSITION TO E-CONVEYANCING APPLICATIONS IN THE U.S. AND ABROAD Michael E. Doversberger* INTRODUCTION A real property interest is arguably the most sacred form of ownership, and is "the largest and most important transaction in most people's lives. ." A home or business is not only of personal importance for many but also the most significant financial asset they possess. Society, therefore, has an interest in ensuring that conveyances of real property are undertaken in a controlled and predictable manner. However, in an increasingly digital world focused on speed and efficiency, the paper- centric U.S. real estate conveyance process has become archaic. This has resulted in an uncomfortable position for parties to real estate transactions, as the transition to new electronic processes is sometimes viewed as undermining the reliability of the past. Despite the significance attached to a real estate transaction, the pending digital conversion cannot be ignored. How society reacts to these changes will determine the ease with which the transition to e-conveyances occurs. Part One will begin with a brief discussion that highlights the international support of e-conveyance applications and the general embrace of "secure, paperless, electronic, end to end, pre-sale to post-completion conveyancing."2 This section will specifically address conveyancing applications in Canada, Scotland, Ireland, Denmark, and Australia. Part Two will then provide a detailed analysis of the comprehensive English e- conveyance system, including how it operates, the problems associated with it, the legal implications of the system, and where England stands today in implementing e-conveyance applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Copyhold, Equity, and the Common Law by Charles
    BOOK REVIEWS Copyhold, Equity, and the Common Law. By Charles Montgomery Gray. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1963. Pp. 254. $6.50. Copyholds are not. and never have been a part of the American law of property.' Hence American lawyers-even those who specialize in the law of property-will not be immediately concerned with Professor Gray's monograph on Copyhold, Equity, and the Common Law. Nevertheless, American legal scholars, some of whom will surely be conveyancers, should be much interested in and perhaps even excited by Professor Gray's report. It is an extensive study of the numerous bills and other pleadings in the Court of Chancery, the Star Chamber, and the Court of Requests of the reign of Henry VIII, examined at the Public Records Office, and of the many unprinted reports of common law cases, princi- pally of the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, found in various collections of manuscripts in the British Museum. The appeal of the study for American lawyers will not depend upon the details of the law of copyholds which Professor Gray reports, but rather upon the development of remedies for the protection of copy- holders which he traces in careful detail. At the beginning of the period of the study, copyhold lands were "owned" by the lord of the manor in which they were situated. Though those lands had been used by the copyholders and their predecessors from time immemorial, the interest which they had was classified as a tenancy at the will of the lord of the manor in whom both the seisin and the freehold were vested.
    [Show full text]
  • Trust Funds in Common Law and Civil Law Systems: a Comparative Analysis
    University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review Volume 13 Issue 2 Article 3 4-1-2006 Trust Funds In Common Law And Civil Law Systems: A Comparative Analysis Carly Howard Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umiclr Part of the Civil Law Commons, Common Law Commons, Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Carly Howard, Trust Funds In Common Law And Civil Law Systems: A Comparative Analysis, 13 U. Miami Int’l & Comp. L. Rev. 343 (2006) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umiclr/vol13/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TRUST FUNDS IN COMMON LAW AND CIVIL LAW SYSTEMS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Carly Howard* 1. Introduction ........................................................................... 344 1.1. D efi nitions ............................................................................ 345 1.1.1. D efinition of a Trust .................................................... 345 1.1.2. Definition of an International Trust and Offshore T ru st ....................................................................................... 34 5 1.2. Purposes for International Trusts ..................................... 346 2. Formalities of Common Law Trusts ............................... 347 2.1 Establishment of Trusts ...................................................... 347 2.2 T ypes of T rusts ..................................................................... 347 3. History of Common Law and Civil Law Systems .......... 348 3.1. History of Common Law Trusts ........................................ 348 3.1.1 History of Trusts in England ......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Maine Roads and Easements
    Maine Law Review Volume 48 Number 2 Article 3 April 2018 Maine Roads and Easements Knud E. Hermansen Donald R. Richards Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/mlr Part of the Land Use Law Commons, and the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation Knud E. Hermansen & Donald R. Richards, Maine Roads and Easements, 48 Me. L. Rev. 197 (2018). Available at: https://digitalcommons.mainelaw.maine.edu/mlr/vol48/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Maine School of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maine Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Maine School of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MAINE ROADS AND EASEMENTS Knud E. Hermansen & Donald R. Richards I. INTRODUCTION ........................................ 200 II. EASEMENT TERMS AND CLASSIFICATIONS ............. 202 A. Appurtenant Easements and Easements in Gross .. 203 B. Public Easements and Private Easements .......... 204 III. EASEMENT STATUS AND USES ........................ 205 A. Easement or Fee Simple Title ...................... 205 1. Operative Records ............................. 206 2. Common Law ................................. 206 3. Range-Ways and Range-Roads ................. 207 B. Title Within the Easement ......................... 209 C. Multiple Uses/Easements .......................... 210 D. CorrelativeRights and Appurtenances ............. 211 1. Express or Clearly Intended ................... 211 2. Implied Rights and Limitations ................ 212 a. Utilities in Private Road Easements ........ 217 b. Utilities in Public Roads .................. 217 c. Obstructions .............................. 218 d. PrescriptiveEasements .................... 218 e. Exclude the Obvious ...................... 220 f Increased Traffic Not Speed ............... 220 g. Subdivision of the Appurtenant Parcel..... 220 h. Accessing Non-Appurtenant Parcels ......
    [Show full text]
  • Title 21 – Real Property
    21 GCA REAL PROPERTY CH. 3 ESTATES IN GENERAL CHAPTER 3 ESTATES IN GENERAL § 3101. Enumeration of Estates. § 3102. Estate in Fee Simple. § 3103. Conditional Fees, Estates Tail Abolished. § 3104. Certain Remainders Valid. § 3105. Freeholds, Chattels Real, Chattel Interests. § 3106. Estates, Life, Third Person, Freehold. § 3107. Future Estates. § 3108. Reversions. § 3109. Remainders. § 3110. Suspended Ownership. § 3111. Suspension by Trust. § 3112. Contingent Remainder in Fee. § 3113. Remainders, Future and Contingent Estates. § 3114. Life Estates, Limitations. § 3115. Remainders, Generally. § 3116. Contingent Remainders, Generally. § 3117. Remainder of Estates for Life. § 3118. Remainder Upon a Contingency. § 3119. Life Tenant Heirs, Purchasers. § 3120. Construction, Certain Remainders. § 3121. Effect, Power of Appointment. § 3101. Enumeration of Estates. Estates in real property, in respect to the duration of their enjoyment, are either: 1. Estates of inheritance or perpetual estates; 2. Estates for life; 3. Estates for years; or 4. Estates at will. SOURCE: CC '761. § 3102. Estate in Fee Simple. Every estate of inheritance is a fee, and every such estate, when not defeasible or conditional, is a fee simple or an absolute fee. 1 COL120106 21 GCA REAL PROPERTY CH. 3 ESTATES IN GENERAL SOURCE: CC '762. § 3103. Conditional Fees, Estates Tail Abolished. Estates tail are abolished, and every estate which would be at common law adjudged to be a fee tail is a fee simple; and if no valid remainder is limited thereon, is a fee simple absolute. SOURCE: CC '763. § 3104. Certain Remainders Valid. Where a remainder in fee is limited upon any estate, which would by the common law be adjudged a fee tail, such remainder is valid as a contingent limitation upon a fee, and vests in possession on the death of the first taker, without issue living at the time of his death.
    [Show full text]