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.