Which of the following is a true statement?

• To create a life estate, the grantor must use the language “for life.”

• A life estate can be created by reference to an absolute restraint on alienation when written by a layperson.

• A life estate can be created by reference to an absolute restraint on alienation regardless of whether it is written by a layperson.

• A life estate pur autre vie is a permissible restraint on alienation.

While cleaning the waiting room at a doctor’s office, a privately contracted janitorial service found a wallet on the end table near the front door.  The nurse took the wallet from the janitor who found it and put it in the break room.  Later the receptionist found the wallet in the break room on the counter and put it in her purse. Assume that the original owner of the wallet is neither the janitor, nurse, receptionist or doctor.  Who has superior right to the wallet over all but the true owner provided that the doctor was running his own business?

• The janitor.

• The nurse.

• The receptionist.

• The doctor.

• No one.

William, a second-year law student, suffers from a life-threatening illness. He is currently under treatment but in contemplation of the worst he drafts a short handwritten will that states, “to my sister Samantha I give my ownership interest in Blueacre in full when I die; however, if Samantha ever tries to transfer that interest, then to my mother, Daniella.”  He hands the will to Samantha and tells her to keep the will safe in case the treatment doesn’t work.  William dies from his illness.  Assuming the will is valid, which of the following is a true statement?

• Samantha holds a life estate, but only if the court applies the Texas presumption on interpreting wills written by laypeople.

• Samantha holds a fee simple absolute because Daniella's interest violates the What-Might-Happen test of the Rule Against Perpetuities.

• Samantha holds a fee simple absolute because the prohibition on transfer is an absolute restraint on alienation.

• Samantha holds a fee simple subject to condition subsequent, and Daniella owns a shifting executory interest in fee simple absolute.

• William made a valid gift causa mortis.

Ophelia conveys Blueacre “to the City of Houston so long as Blueacre is used for a zoo.”  The City uses the land for a zoo for one hundred years, then begins negotiations to sell the land to the organization Friends of the Houston Zoo (“Friends”).  Friends plans to continue to operate Blueacre as a zoo.  You are the lawyer for Friends.  Which of the following is the best advice for Friends?

• Friends should not buy the land because the City’s interest will terminate as soon as the City transfers title to Friends.

• Once the conveyance is complete, Friends can use the land for any purpose because Ophelia’s interest is invalid under all three types of the Rule Against Perpetuities.

• Friends can buy a valid interest in the land, but it will only retain title if it uses the land for a zoo.

• Friends cannot purchase a valid interest in Blueacre without Ophelia's consent.

Joel and Mark, brothers, share ownership of a house. When Joel dies, Mark has sole ownership of the property. How was the house owned prior to Joel's death?

• Tenancy by the entirety.

• Joint tenancy.

• Tenancy in common.

• Tenancy in severalty.

Alicia and Bart are married in a common law marital property state. The next day, Bart dies. Before Bart died, his estate consisted of Blueacre (which he held in fee simple determinable), Redacre (which he held in life estate), Greenacre (which he held in fee simple absolute, but as a joint tenancy with his son Charles), and $500,000 in cash, stocks, bonds, and other personal property. Assume Charles the son is still alive. In a jurisdiction that follows the common law rules regarding distribution of property at death, what will Alicia receive when Bart’s estate is distributed?

• A life estate in Blueacre, a life estate in Redacre, and one-third of the personal property.

• One-third of the personal property and a life estate in one-third of Blueacre.

• One-third each of Blueacre, Redacre, and Greenacre, and one-third of the personal property.

• Nothing, because they had been married only one day, which is not enough time for death benefits to accrue under the common law system.

A husband and wife own property as tenants by the entirety. A victim of a car accident has a judgment against the wife after a court found she was negligent in causing a car accident that injured the victim. The victim properly filed the judgment and has a lien on the wife’s real property.  The victim sues to enforce the lien on the tenancy by the entirety. Who owns the land?

• The husband, but only in a Group III jurisdiction.

• The husband and the creditor, but only in a Group I jurisdiction.

• The creditor, but only in a Group II jurisdiction.

• The husband and the wife, but only in Group I or Group III jurisdictions.

Tammy devises Blueacre "to my children as joint tenants with the right of survivorship." At the time of her death, Tammy had two children: Abe and Barbara. Abe and Barbara take out a loan and give the bank a mortgage on Blueacre. By agreement, Barbara pays her half of the loan payment to Abe, and Abe pays the other half. Abe is responsible for sending in the fully monthly mortgage payment to the bank. Abe fails to pay the mortgage for six months and the bank forecloses. At the foreclosure sale, Barbara purchases Blueacre and then files an action in ejectment to evict Abe from the land. Issues of fraud or theft by Abe aside, what will be the likely result?

• Barbara takes the land in full because she purchased the land at the foreclosure sale. She is not entitled to reimbursement of Abe's share because she owns the land in full.

• Barbara is entitled to reimbursement from Abe of the entire amount she paid for the land at the foreclosure sale, but she cannot evict Abe from the property.

• Barbara is entitled to contribution from Ben for his share of the loan payments, but she cannot evict Abe from the property.

• Barbara is not entitled to contribution and cannot evict Abe from the property, but she will receive a greater share of the land if they ever partition.

Homer and Wanda are married in a common law marital property state that recognizes dower and curtesy. During marriage, Homer purchases Blueacre in fee simple absolute with his earnings. He takes title as joint tenants with right of survivorship with his brother, Ben. Homer and Wanda had no children. Homer dies. What is the state of Blueacre’s title?

• Ben owns two-thirds of Blueacre outright, but only a vested remainder in one-third. As to that third, Wanda holds a life estate because of her dower right.

• Wanda holds a life estate in Blueacre because of her dower right, and Ben holds a vested remainder.

• Wanda and Ben own Blueacre as tenants in common.

• Ben owns Blueacre because of his right of survivorship.

Hunter and Willa, husband and wife, live in Arcadia, a common law marital property state.  They have no children.  Arcadia has a modern elective forced share statute that entitles a surviving spouse to one-half of all of the decedent spouse’s real and personal property devisable by will or descendible by intestacy.  Hunter and Willa own Blueacre as tenants by the entirety.  Willa saves from her earnings $120,000 in Arcadia.  Willa dies, devising all of her property to her sister, Sally.  Who owns the $120,000 and Blueacre?

• Sally gets $80,000.  Hunter gets $40,000, and all of Blueacre.

• Sally gets $60,000 and Willa’s half of Blueacre.  Hunter gets $60,000 and Hunter’s half of Blueacre.

• Sally gets $60,000.  Hunter takes $60,000 and all of Blueacre.

• Sally gets all of Blueacre because Hunter and Willa had no children. Hunter gets $120,000 because it is personal property.