Fee Simple Subject To An Executory Limitation
A fee simple subject to an executory limitation is an estate that ends when a specific condition is met and then transfers to a third party. The interest will not revert to the grantor. If the condition is met, the grantee loses the interest and the third party gains it automatically.
Example:
O grants Blackacre to A and A's heir; but if A ever accepts a candy bar from C, then to B and B's heirs.
Here, O is the original owner. She grants A a fee simple subject to the subsequent condition that he doesn't accept a candy bar from C. But unlike a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, Blackacre goes to a third party (B) instead of the grantor (O) if the condition is met. Also unlike a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, B then automatically gains the interest in Blackacre and does not only have a mere right to sue for re-entry.
What would happen if the property were conveyed? Let's say A sold Blackacre to D. If A afterwards accepted an offer for a candy bar from C, Blackacre automatically goes to B. But if A died without ever accepting a candy bar from C, the condition could not possibly be met. D would then have a fee simple absolute.
Read more about this topic: Defeasible Estate
Famous quotes containing the words fee, simple, subject and/or limitation:
“..for a prostitute’s fee is only a loaf of bread, but the wife of another stalks a man’s very life.”
—Bible: Hebrew, Proverbs 6:26.
“His character as one of the fathers of the English language would alone make his works important, even those which have little poetical merit. He was as simple as Wordsworth in preferring his homely but vigorous Saxon tongue, when it was neglected by the court, and had not yet attained to the dignity of a literature, and rendered a similar service to his country to that which Dante rendered to Italy.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“Great Negative, how vainly would the Wise
Enquire, define, distinguish, teach, devise,
Didst thou not stand to point their dull Philosophies?
Is, or is not, the two great Ends of Fate,
And, true or false, the Subject of Debate,
That perfect, or destroy, the vast Designs of Fate,”
—John Wilmot, 2d Earl Of Rochester (1909–1969)
“The French are certainly misunderstood:Mbut whether the fault is theirs, in not sufficiently explaining themselves; or speaking with that exact limitation and precision which one would expect ... or whether the fault may not be altogether on our side ... I shall not decide.”
—Laurence Sterne (1713–1768)