Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
9. Who should prevail?
The farmer's son and the college classmate did not reach an agreement, and the farmer's son served the appropriate notice to terminate whatever tenancy the college classmate had. The farmer's son then sought, in an appropriate action, to oust the college classmate.
One week after the delivery of the deed to the farmer's son, the farmer's son recorded the deed and immediately told the college classmate that he was going to begin charging the college classmate rent since «I am now your landlord.» There is no applicable statute.
The farmer, by properly executed instrument, conveyed Greenacre to «my beloved son, his heirs and assigns, upon the condition precedent that he earn a college degree by the time he reaches the age of 30. If, for any reason, he does not meet this condition, then Greenacre shall become the sole property of my beloved daughter, her heirs and assigns.» At the time of conveyance, the farmer's son and the college classmate attended a college located several blocks from Greenacre. Neither had earned a college degree.
A farmer owned Greenacre in fee simple. The small house on Greenacre was occupied, with the farmer's oral permission, rent-free, by the farmer's son, and the college classmate of the farmer's son. The farmer's son was then 21 years old.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A «contingent remainder» is a type of future interest in property that passes to a person or entity only upon the existence of a certain set of circumstances at the time the title-holder dies. It is a future property ownership right that depends upon the fulfillment of specific conditions. If the specified conditions are not met, the remainder never takes effect. The future interest, otherwise valid, will not be void on the ground of the probability or improbability of the contingency upon which it is limited to take effect.
D is correct. When the farmer conveyed Greenacre to his son, he created a future interest, contingent upon the son's earning of a college degree by the time he turned 30. Until that condition is satisfied, the farmer will continue to have a present possessory interest in Greenacre as the landlord. When the son tried to charge the classmate rent after delivery of the deed, the condition had not yet been satisfied, which means the farmer was still the landlord of the classmate. Even though the son may become the sole owner and possessor of the property if he succeeds in earning a degree by age 30, that contingency has not been met yet, and the son does not have the right to oust the classmate.
A is incorrect. The farmer's son cannot prevail, irrespective of the type of interest created by the conveyance. At the time the son tried to collect rent from the classmate, he did not yet have a possessory interest over Greenacre. As a result, he cannot oust the classmate for failure to pay rent.
B is incorrect. Until the condition precedent is met, the conveyance does not affect the classmate's tenancy in any way. Absent some other agreement between the parties, the farmer still has possession of the estate and may allow the classmate to live there without paying rent.
C is incorrect. This answer reaches the correct answer with the wrong reasoning. The college classmate should prevail, but not because the farmer's permission for the rent-free occupation of the house preceded the farmer's conveyance of Greenacre to the son. The farmer's conveyance to the son, regardless of when it occurred, would have no impact on the classmate's tenancy. Even if the conveyance had occurred first and the farmer later allowed the classmate to move in, the son would still lose because he lacks a current possessory interest.