A widower with a residence in fee simple executes a will providing the home to his daughter for life and then to the grandson’s children. The grandson later has more children. Under the Rule Against Perpetuities and the Rule of Convenience, who now owns the residence after all events described?

A widower with a residence in fee simple executes a will providing the home to his daughter for life and then to the grandson’s children. The grandson later has more children. Under the Rule Against Perpetuities and the Rule of Convenience, who now owns the residence after all events described?

• A. Ann
• B. Ann and Bill
• C. Ann, Bill, and Claire
• D. The charity named in the will

Answer: (B)

The key idea is how the Rule Against Perpetuities (RAP) interacts with the Rule of Convenience (RoC) in a will that gives a life estate to one person and then a remainder to a class of beneficiaries—here, the grandson’s children. With a life estate to the daughter, the subsequent interest is a remainder to the grandson’s children. Under RAP, a future interest must vest within a life-in-being plus 21 years. The RoC helps ensure that a class gift like “grandson’s children” doesn’t violate RAP by treating the class as closed when a member of the class is known to be capable of taking within the permissible period. In practice, that means the class closes at the birth of the first grandchild who could take, and those who are alive at that moment (or named as part of the class when it closes) will be the remainder beneficiaries; later-born grandchildren do not expand the class. In this scenario, the grandson has had children. Because the class closes when a grandchild is in a position to take (i.e., within the permissible period tied to the daughter’s life), the first eligible grandchild to be in existence at the relevant time would take upon the daughter’s death. The life tenant (the daughter, Ann) has a present possessory interest now, and the grandchild who is in the class who will take upon Ann’s death (Bill, in the given setup) already exists as a potential taker. Therefore, the residence is currently owned in two interests: Ann holds the life estate, and Bill holds the future interest that will vest at Ann’s death. That’s why the correct choice is Ann and Bill. The other options don’t fit because the charity would only take if the remainder to the grandson’s children failed entirely under RAP, which RoC prevents in this setup; and including Claire (or the charity) would require the class to be extant or to vest in other ways that aren’t supported by the given facts.

The key idea is how the Rule Against Perpetuities (RAP) interacts with the Rule of Convenience (RoC) in a will that gives a life estate to one person and then a remainder to a class of beneficiaries—here, the grandson’s children.

With a life estate to the daughter, the subsequent interest is a remainder to the grandson’s children. Under RAP, a future interest must vest within a life-in-being plus 21 years. The RoC helps ensure that a class gift like “grandson’s children” doesn’t violate RAP by treating the class as closed when a member of the class is known to be capable of taking within the permissible period. In practice, that means the class closes at the birth of the first grandchild who could take, and those who are alive at that moment (or named as part of the class when it closes) will be the remainder beneficiaries; later-born grandchildren do not expand the class.

In this scenario, the grandson has had children. Because the class closes when a grandchild is in a position to take (i.e., within the permissible period tied to the daughter’s life), the first eligible grandchild to be in existence at the relevant time would take upon the daughter’s death. The life tenant (the daughter, Ann) has a present possessory interest now, and the grandchild who is in the class who will take upon Ann’s death (Bill, in the given setup) already exists as a potential taker. Therefore, the residence is currently owned in two interests: Ann holds the life estate, and Bill holds the future interest that will vest at Ann’s death. That’s why the correct choice is Ann and Bill.

The other options don’t fit because the charity would only take if the remainder to the grandson’s children failed entirely under RAP, which RoC prevents in this setup; and including Claire (or the charity) would require the class to be extant or to vest in other ways that aren’t supported by the given facts.