Johnson, p. 111: Practice Problems
1. Here’s a clear case of Mary receiving a fee simple absolute.
2. Mary gets a life estate in Goldacre, and it would seem that Oswald implicitly gives himself a reversion.
3. Same as #2, Mary gets a life estate at common law. But under some statutes, Mary might get a fee simple absolute if there is no evidence that the grantor intended anything else.
4. I’m trying to think whether this is a life estate plus a reversion or a life estate plus a remainder. I think it’s a life estate plus a reversion to Oswald that will pass to Julio upon Oswald’s death (“the name stays the same”). It will then “mature” into a fee simple absolute upon Mary’s death.
5. This looks like a life estate to Mary plus a remainder to John that “matures” into a fee simple absolute.
6. This is no problem according to the casebook authors. I think Mary gets her fee simple absolute.
7. Mary has a life estate, so even though she tries to give John a fee simple absolute, she can only sell him what’s left of her life estate (i.e. ownership of the property until she dies). Oswald retains the reversion.
8. No, the son and daughter are confused. The language about “her heirs” is merely symbolic and doesn’t mean Mary’s kids have any interest in the estate.