Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
13 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Joint Tenants
|
|
|
|
• O →Blackacre→ to A,B, and C as joint tenants. • A → D. • B dies intestate, leaving H as his heir. If A, B and C are JTWRoS ||||| State of title?
|
• A’s conveyance to D is a severance, so D now has 1/3 as a TIC b/c there were 3 original co-tenants. B and C are JTWRoS. When B dies, his 1/3 migrates to C. • State of Title: D and C own B/A. D has 1/3 and C has 2/3. They are TIC.
|
|
|
• O →Blackacre→ to A,B, and C as joint tenants. • A → D. • B dies intestate, leaving H as his heir. If A, B and C are JTWRoS ||||| State of title? What if B died leaving a will devising interest to H?
|
• Even if a will were created in H, it doesn’t matter, C gets the interest. A will doesn’t affect transference of a JTWRoS, even if it purports to specifically transfer the interest.
|
|
|
• O →Blackacre→ to A,B, and C as joint tenants. • A → D. • B dies intestate, leaving H as his heir. If A, B and C are JTWRoS ||||| If A, B and C are TICs \\\ State of title?
|
• After A’s conveyance, D, B and C are TIC
|
|
|
• O →Blackacre→ to A,B, and C as joint tenants. • A → D. • B dies intestate, leaving H as his heir. If A, B and C are JTWRoS ||||| If A, B and C are TICs\\\ What if B died leaving a will devising interest to H? \\\ State of title?
|
|
|
|
T devises →B/A→ “To A + B for their joint lives, REM to the survivor.” \\\\ Interests created by devise?
|
• Not a JTWRoS since the language is insufficient (It does not say “to A+B as JTRWOS, to A + B as JT + not as TIC”). Also, JTWRoS is no longer the default. • A and B own something for their joint lives – they own the present estate – a TIC of a life estate. Survivor has a CR, O has a technical RVN.
|
|
|
Assume A is risk adverse and much older than B and doesn’t want the interest to go to B after he dies. ---- How does JTWRoS in FSA differ from the arrangements: T devises →B/A→ “To A + B for their joint lives, REM to the survivor.” AND • O →Blackacre→ to A,B, and C as joint tenants. • A → D. • B dies intestate, leaving H as his heir. If A, B and C are JTWRoS ??
|
If A had a JTWRoS, A’s lawyer would have to turn the interest into a TIC by severing the JT, so that it wouldn’t go to B, the survivor, but rather A’s heirs if A dies w/o a will or to A’s devisees if A leaves the interest in a will. \\\ Conversely, if A had a TIC, there’s nothing A can do; there’s no way to unpackage the present and future interests; it’s setup so when A inevitably dies first, then B becomes the owner unless A pays B money to unravel the arrangement. As it stands, B only has to sit around and wait for A to die so B probably wouldn’t be wiling to unravel the arrangement, but A might try to capitalize on B’s want for money now as opposed to later after A dies.
|
|
|
What result--what kind of joint estate is it? \\\ A and B are planning to be married. 2 weeks before the ceremony, they buy a house and take title in “A and B as tenants by the entirety.” Several years after the marriage, A moves out of the house and conveys his interest in the house to his brother C. C brings an action to partition the property.
|
• No TBE b/c they weren’t married yet so either TIC or JTWROS. • What best effectuates their intent? → JTWROS - Default is TIC. But, they intended a TBE which carries with it ROS. Since ROS exists in the JTWROS as well as the TBE, we presume their expressed intent and give them JTWROS, so they’ll also have ROS, which brings them closer to TBE which is what they really wanted.
|
|
|
• A moves out and conveys to C. What result? \\\ A and B are planning to be married. 2 weeks before the ceremony, they buy a house and take title in “A and B as tenants by the entirety.” Several years after the marriage, A moves out of the house and conveys his interest in the house to his brother C. C brings an action to partition the property.
|
*- By transferring his interest to his brother, C, A has severed the JTWROS thereby affecting an express severance. - If A and B had a TBE, A would be precluded from conveying to C. A TBE can’t be severed.
|
|
|
• Why has no court ever implied a K not to sever a TBE?
|
*- In theory, a court could have implied a K between the fiancés, A and B, to not sever. But, no judge ever did that. How come? 2 answers 1. Nobody ever thought of it. 2. We dislike direct restraints on alienation, so we don’t imply them. B147
|
|
|
• C the new owner brings an action to partition the property. What result? \\\ A and B are planning to be married. 2 weeks before the ceremony, they buy a house and take title in “A and B as tenants by the entirety.” Several years after the marriage, A moves out of the house and conveys his interest in the house to his brother C. C brings an action to partition the property.
|
*- C’s partition action will prevail. Co-owners of TIC or JTWROS can always partition the premises.
|
|
|
End Result? \\\ A and B are planning to be married. 2 weeks before the ceremony, they buy a house and take title in “A and B as tenants by the entirety.” Several years after the marriage, A moves out of the house and conveys his interest in the house to his brother C. C brings an action to partition the property.
|
• End result: These folks who wanted a TBE, but couldn’t have it b/c they weren’t married, likely got a JTWROS, and they can sever it, unlike the TBE.
|
|
|
Illustration: Suppose Dobris and you bought B/A as JTWROS and you do 9/10ths of the work and put up 9/10ths of the money. \\\\ what does TTIP do? How is this remedied?
|
• Dobris will partition his pot of money and take his half. TTIP! • A judge exercising her equitable powers in the accounting proceedings might do what’s fair by making Dobris turn out his profits and give them to you in pursuit of equity.
|
