3. Title to Blackacre is now in

B is correct. The following estates were created by the testator's will: the nephew held a life estate pur autre vie (measured by the life of another) in Blackacre for as long as the brother lived; the brother held no estate whatsoever; the sister held a vested remainder in Blackacre during the brother's lifetime, and then when the brother died title went to the sister in fee simple. Neither the friend nor the son held any interest in Blackacre.

A is incorrect. A life estate grants present possession for the length of the measuring life. In this case, it is a life estate pur autre vie measured by the length of the brother's life. Because this interest is a devise in a will, the interest could end (the brother could die) before or after the testator. In either event, when the measuring life ends, the life estate terminates and the next interested holder takes possession (here the sister holds the vested remainder in fee simple absolute). In this case, when the testator dies, there is no life estate in the nephew because the brother (the measuring life) has already died.

C is incorrect. Although the son is the closest heir, he enjoys no rights in this case because all of the testator's estate passed by a valid will. The son would take only if the will was invalid or if the son was included in the will. When the testator decided to leave the son out of the will he decided he did not want his property to pass to the son.

D is incorrect. The question asks who takes Blackacre. Since Blackacre was devised to the nephew for the life of the brother with remainder to the sister, the friend has no interest in Blackacre. If for some reason the devise of Blackacre was invalid (e.g., fraud, duress, coercion, or undue influence) then the holder of the residue (the friend) would take Blackacre. Here, the will was entirely valid.