Pigg v. Haley
Supreme
Court of
224
Johnson,
pp. 115-121
Facts: Mr. Haley died, leaving
some uncertainty in his will. It was not
clear what interest he left to his wife and what he left to his distant cousin,
Mr. Pigg. Mrs. Haley and Mr. Pigg tried
to cooperatively resolve the uncertainty by signing a written agreement that Mrs.
Haley would get all of Mr. Haley’s personal property, while she would only get
a life estate in his real property followed by a remainder for Mr. Pigg in fee
simple absolute. Later, Mrs. Haley tried
to sell some of the land to some of the other Haleys. All the Haleys sued Pigg, claiming “an
equitable fee interest” in the land to be purchased and sold. The trial court found for the plaintiffs on
the ground that the written agreement was void for lack of consideration.
Issue: Was the agreement between Mrs.
Haley and Mr. Pigg supported by adequate consideration?
Rule: By statute, a conveyance is
in fee simple absolute unless there is a contrary intention. By precedent, life estate plus absolute power
of disposition equals fee simple absolute and any remainder is automatically void. But then, by statute again, life estate plus
absolute power of disposition leaves a remainder in whatever the life tenant
doesn’t sell or consume in his or her lifetime.
Analysis: Mrs. Haley argues that Pigg
got nothing, while Pigg argues that the will left at least some remainder to
him that could constitute valid consideration for the subsequent written
agreement. The court agrees with Pigg
and finds that he traded his remainder in for a remainder in the real property. The court also won’t declare the agreement
void for mistake of law because the court says that the whole point of the
agreement was to eliminate uncertainty about the effect of the law on the
parties. Thus, the court holds that the
agreement is valid and enforceable.
Conclusion: The trial court is reversed
and the agreement is declared valid.