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.
23. Who will likely prevail?
The wife died and under her will bequeathed her entire estate to her nephew. She also named the nephew as the personal representative of her estate. After the nephew, in his capacity as personal representative, removed the chandelier and replaced it with the original light fixture shortly after the wife's death, the son sued to have the chandelier reinstalled.
The wife later removed a light fixture in the dining room of the house and replaced it with a chandelier that was one of her family heirlooms. She then informed her nephew and her late husband's son that after her death, the chandelier should be removed from the dining room and replaced with the former light fixture, which she had stored in the basement.
A man conveyed his house to his wife for life, remainder to his only child, a son by a previous marriage. Thereafter, the man died, devising his entire estate to his son.
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
In both types of ownership cases, where the items become incorporated into the realty so fully that they lose their identity, they become part of the realty. Similarly, where identification of the chattel is still possible, but removal would cause considerable loss or destruction, the items are considered fixtures (like heating pipes in a house).
For divided ownership cases, the question is whether the ownership of the chattel has passed to the landowner. Accession is the term used to describe the intent of the annexor to make the chattels a permanent part of the real estate.
A is correct. As the life tenant, the wife had a right to annex a chattel, in this case, the chandelier. It was clear that the wife did not intend to make the chandelier a permanent annexation, as evidenced by her discussions with her nephew and the man's son. Thus, the nephew could remove the chandelier a reasonable amount of time after her death, as her personal representative.
B is incorrect. This response correctly concludes that the nephew, as the personal representative, had the right to remove the chandelier, but it misstates the rationale. The doctrine of accession applies only in situations in which one person annexes chattels to real property owned by another under such circumstances that the law will not permit the chattels' removal. In this case, the wife, the life tenant, annexed the chandelier to her own real property, which she held in a life estate. The nephew, as the personal representative, had the right to remove the chandelier within a reasonable period of time after the wife's death.
C is incorrect. The wife's personal representative, the nephew, had the right to remove the chandelier within a reasonable time after the termination of the wife's life estate. The wife specifically agreed to a temporary arrangement before her death, so her personal representative is merely carrying out her wishes.
D is incorrect. A trade fixture is a fixture installed by a tenant in a trade or business. At the end of the lease term, the tenant may typically remove any trade fixtures that have been installed, provided that substantial damage will not occur as a result of the removal. In this case, the wife was a life tenant in a house who annexed a chattel — the chandelier — in the dining room of that house. It is clear that the wife did not intend to make the annexation permanent, as evidenced by her discussions with her nephew and the son. The nephew, as the personal representative, had the right to remove the chandelier within a reasonable time after the termination of the wife's life estate.