Property Midterm

Jack and Jill, brother and sister, owned Greenacre as joint tenants.  Jack sold his interest in the property to Buyer.  Then Jill died, leaving her estate to Son.  What is the state of the title?

• Buyer and Son own Greenacre as joint tenants.

• Buyer and Son own Greenacre as tenants in common.

•  Buyer owns Greenacre in fee simple absolute.

• Son owns Greenacre in fee simple absolute

Answer explanation

Sale destroys joint tenancy, and tenancy in common is inheritable.

In a deed, Owner conveyed Blackacre “to A for life, remainder to such of A’s grandchildren as are then living.”  At the time of the conveyance, A had one living grandchild named B.  Is the interest of the grandchildren valid under the traditional Rule Against Perpetuities?

• Yes, because A is the validating life

• Yes, because A’s children are the validating lives.

• Yes, because B is the validating life.

• No, because there are no validating lives.

Answer explanation

A could have after-born children.

In a will, O conveyed Whiteacre “to A for life, remainder to O’s children.”  When O died, he had two children B and C.  However, B died before A died, so that O’s only surviving child at the time of A’s death was C.  Under the traditional Rule Against Perpetuities, what is the state of the title?

• C owns Whiteacre in fee simple absolute.

• C and B’s estate own Whiteacre as tenants in common or joint tenants.

• Neither B’s estate nor C has a valid interest in the property.

• B’s estate owns Whiteacre in fee simple absolute.

Answer explanation

Under the will, Child did not need to survive to have an inheritable interest.

 Redacre is located in California, as are A and B.  A conveys Redacre “to B as long as the property is used for school purposes.”  After 10 years, B decides to tear down the school and put up a pig sty.  What is the state of the title?

•  B has a fee simple determinable, and A has a possibility of reverter.

• A owns Redacre in fee simple absolute.

•  B has a fee simple on condition subsequent, and A has a right of entry.

•  B has a fee simple determinable, and A has a right of entry.

Answer explanation

No fee simple determinable in California; rights of entry must be exercised.

O conveys Pinkacre “to A for life, remainder to A’s widow.”  The state in question has a “wait and see” statute modifying the traditional Rule Against Perpetuities.   A dies five years later, still married to his one and only wife W.  Does W have a valid interest in the property?

• Yes, because her interest was vested from the beginning, and vested interests are not threatened by the Rule Against Perpetuities.

• No because the Rule Against Perpetuities would invalidate her interest due to the lack of validating lives.

• Yes, because when A died, W’s interest became vested within the period of the Rule Against Perpetuities.

• No because “widow” is an unascertained individual at the time of the conveyance, making her interest contingent rather than vested.

Answer explanation

Widow became an identified person after waiting period.

 Owner conveys Yellowacre “to A, but if the land is ever used as a race track, to B.”   As Owner feared, A turned the land into a horse race track.  What is the state of the title after the track is completed?

• A has a contingent remainder and B has an alternative contingent remainder.

• A has a fee simple subject to an executory limitation, and B has an executory interest.

• B owns the land in fee simple absolute because the condition on A’s retaining the land has failed.

• The land reverts to Owner or, if she is deceased, to her estate.

Answer explanation

A’s interest is expressed as a fee interest that can be cut short.

Which of the following would be an example of the (so-called) tragedy of the anticommons?

• A shopping mall developer is having difficulty acquiring a large enough parcel because several local businesses that would have to be acquired are refusing to sell.

• Fish in the ocean are being depleted at a rapid rate because they are not owned until they are caught.

• Cars cannot move at rush hour because everyone is crowded onto the freeways.

• A tenant has an incentive to waste property if not restrained by the remainderman.

Answer explanation

A problem of needing to acquire too many inefficiently small rights.

 Which of the following is NOT an example of the common law’s tendency to attribute initial ownership to capture rather than pursuit?

• The common law approach to the ownership of oil and gas.

• The common law approach to the tort of interference with prospective economic advantage.

• The common law approach to the ownership of wild animals.

• The common law approach to the ownership of underground water.

Answer explanation

Interference with prospective advantage protects pursuit of contracts.

 If the law decided that companies could no longer trademark their products, what would be likely to happen?

• The quality of merchandise would improve.

• The quality of merchandise would decline.

• The quality of merchandise would be unaffected.

• Firms would acquire greater monopoly power in the marketplace.

Answer explanation

Trademarks serve a bonding function to increase quality.

Which of the following “fair use” factors do the courts consider LEAST significant in evaluating a fair use defense to a copyright infringement claim?

• Whether the defendant’s use of the plaintiff’s work was transformative in nature.

•  Whether the defendant’s use of the plaintiff’s work was likely to reduce sales by the plaintiff.

• Whether the defendant copied a large or a small amount of the plaintiff’s work.

• Whether the nature of the plaintiff’s work was a core concern of copyright law, such as fictional writing.

Answer explanation

The other factors are stressed; nature of the work is downplayed.