1 / 87

Shapira v. Union National Bank

Shapira v. Union National Bank. & DQS E13-E15. SHAPIRA : DISTINCTIONS. Gift conditioned upon religious faith of beneficiary v. Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of particular faith. SHAPIRA : DISTINCTIONS.

dahlia
Download Presentation

Shapira v. Union National Bank

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Shapira v. Union National Bank & DQS E13-E15

  2. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Gift conditioned upon religious faith of beneficiary v. Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of particular faith

  3. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Gift conditioned upon religious faith of beneficiary v. Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of particular faith • Belief v. Conduct (Marriage in 1974) • Administrability

  4. ADMINISTRABILITY • To Pigpen, so long as the kitchens and bathrooms are always kept very clean. • To Schroeder, so long as he never plays any work by Beethoven on the piano.

  5. ADMINISTRABILITY • To Lucy so long as she remains a member of the Society of Friends • To Linus, so long as he remains a good Catholic

  6. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Gift conditioned upon divorce v. Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of particular faith

  7. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Gift conditioned upon divorce v. Gift conditioned upon marriage to person of particular faith • Ct: Latter not sufficient to encourage fake M & divorce • Grantee can’t avoid condition by saying “I will act in bad faith”

  8. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Conditional gift with “gift over” to third party v. Conditional gift without “gift over”

  9. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Conditional gift with “gift over” to third party v. Conditional gift without “gift over” Comprehensive plan v. “In Terrorem” condition

  10. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Forcing a marriage as condition of completed gift v. withholding gift until marriage made

  11. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Forcing a marriage as condition of completed gift v. withholding gift until marriage made • Remedy: Injunction v. Forfeiting Gift • Like case involving divorce settlement requirement that child be raised in partic. faith: won’t impose contempt/crim sanctions for not following religion

  12. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Quaker men (Maddox) v. Jewish women (Shapira)

  13. SHAPIRA: DISTINCTIONS • Quaker men (Maddox) v. Jewish women(Shapira) • Too Few Available Partners (e.g., you must marry one of the Bronte Sisters)

  14. DQE14. Was the Maddox opinion cited in Shapira correct to rule that these kinds of conditions are unacceptable where there is a sufficiently “small number of eligible” partners?

  15. DQE14. Was the Maddox opinion cited in Shapira correct to rule that these kinds of conditions are unacceptable where there is a sufficiently “small number of eligible” partners? Too much restriction on grantee v. Grantor’s rights

  16. DQE14. Maddox rules that these kinds of conditions are unacceptable where there is a sufficiently “small number of eligible” partners.How few partners must there be to meet the test?

  17. DQE14. Maddox: unacceptable where there is a sufficiently “small number of eligible” partners.If you were living in a state with that test, how would you prove it was met?

  18. DQE15: Should a court enforce conditions that limit or mandate religious behavior for the grantee?

  19. RULES THAT FURTHER ALIENABILITY

  20. DOCTRINE OF WORTHIER TITLE • Remainder or executory interest in grantor’s heirs treated as future interest in grantor

  21. DOCTRINE OF WORTHIER TITLE • Remainder or executory interest in grantor’s heirs treated as future interest in grantor • Today usually a rule of construction, not a rule of law

  22. DOCTRINE OF WORTHIER TITLE • Remainder or executory interest in grantor’s heirs treated as future interest in grantor • Today usually a rule of construction, not a rule of law • Abolished in many jurisdictions

  23. DOCTRINE OF WORTHIER TITLE • Remainder or executory interest in grantor’s heirs treated as future interest in grantor • Today usually a rule of construction, not a rule of law • Abolished in many jurisdictions • NOTE: Grantor must be alive at time of grant for DWT to apply

  24. DOCTRINE OF WORTHIER TITLE Example: While alive, Oscar conveys: “to Agnes for life, then to my heirs.”

  25. Doctrine of Worthier Title Example: While alive, Oscar conveys: “to Agnes for life, then to my heirs.” As written: Agnes has life estate O’s heirs have contingent remainder O has reversion

  26. DOCTRINE OF WORTHIER TITLE O “to Agnes for life, then to my heirs.” As written: Agnes has life estate O’s heirs have contingent remainder O has reversion If A dies, and no destructability, O has fee simple on exec. limitation & heirs have springing executory interest.

  27. DOCTRINE OF WORTHIER TITLE O “to Agnes for life, then to my heirs.” As written: Agnes has life estate O’s heirs have contingent remainder O has reversion If A dies, and no destructability, O has fee simple on exec. limitation & heirs have springing executory interest. NOT VERY MARKETABLE!!

  28. DOCTRINE OF WORTHIER TITLE O “to Agnes for life, then to my heirs.” Effect of Doctrine: Agnes has life estate Remainder in O’s heirs treated as “remainder” in O = reversion.

  29. DOCTRINE OF WORTHIER TITLE O “to Agnes for life, then to my heirs.” Effect of Doctrine: Agnes has life estate Remainder in O’s heirs treated as “remainder” in O = reversion. If A dies, O has fee simple absolute

  30. (P): Sleepy “to Happy for life, then to the heirs of Sleepy." As Written: Happy?

  31. (P): Sleepy “to Happy for life, then to the heirs of Sleepy." As Written: Happy: Life Estate Sleepy’s Heirs?

  32. (P): Sleepy “to Happy for life, then to the heirs of Sleepy." As Written:Happy: Life Estate Sleepy’s Heirs: Contingent Remainder Other?

  33. (P): Sleepy “to Happy for life, then to the heirs of Sleepy." As Written: Happy: Life Estate Sleepy’s Heirs: Contingent Remainder Sleepy: Reversion Effect of Doctrine of Worthier Title?

  34. (P): S “to H for life, then to the heirs of S." As Written: Happy: Life Estate Sleepy’s Heirs: Contingent Remainder Sleepy: Reversion Effect of Doctrine of Worthier Title: Happy: Life Estate Sleepy: Reversion

  35. (P): S “to H for life, then to the heirs of S.”Sleepy dies, devising all to ANA.Intestacy statute would give S’s property to Bashful if no will. Effect As Written?Happy: Life Estate Sleepy’s Heirs: Contingent Remainder Sleepy: Reversion

  36. (P): S “to H for life, then to the heirs of S.”Sleepy dies, devising all to ANA. Intestacy statute would give S’s property to Bashful if no will. Effect As Written? Happy: Life Estate Sleepy’s Heirs: Contingent Remainder  Bashful: Vested Remainder Sleepy: Reversion  Nothing (Divests)

  37. (P): S “to H for life, then to the heirs of S.”Sleepy dies, devising all to ANA. Intestacy statute would give S’s property to Bashful if no will. Effect if Doctrine Applies? Happy: Life Estate Sleepy: Reversion

  38. (P): S “to H for life, then to the heirs of S.”Sleepy dies, devising all to ANA.Intestacy statute would give S’s property to Bashful if no will. Effect if Doctrine Applies? Happy: Life Estate Sleepy: Reversion  ANA: reversion

  39. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION INTERPRET GRANT ACCORDING TO RULE UNLESS EVIDENCE OF GRANTOR’S INTENT TO THE CONTRARY

  40. Doctrine of Worthier Title as a Rule of Construction GEORGE LEAVES BUSH-ACRE: “TO JEB FOR LIFE, THEN TO JEB’S CHILDREN FOR THEIR LIVES, THEN TO MY HEIRS”

  41. Doctrine of Worthier Title as aRule of Construction “TO JEB FOR LIFE, THEN TO JEB’S CHILDREN FOR THEIR LIVES, THEN TO MY HEIRS” We presume George would have wanted to regain complete control of Bush-Acre had he thought he would still be alive after Jeb & children all gone.

  42. Doctrine of Worthier Title as aRule of Construction George leaves Bush-acre “to Jeb for life, then to Jeb’s children for their lives, then to my heirs.It is my wish that the Doctrine of Worthier Title not apply to this grant”

  43. RULE IN SHELLEY’S CASE IF --One Instrument • Creates Life Estate in A • Plus Remainder in A’s Heirs • Both Equitable or Both Legal Remainder in A’s heirs  Remainder in A

  44. RULE IN SHELLEY’S CASE • RULE OF LAW, NOT RULE OF CONSTRUCTION

  45. RULE IN SHELLEY’S CASE • RULE OF LAW, NOT RULE OF CONSTRUCTION • ELIMINATED BY STATUTE IN MOST STATES

  46. (Q)a:Will "to Grace for life, then to Grace's children and their heirs." Effect of the Rule in Shelley’s Case?

  47. (Q)a:Will "to Grace for life, then to Grace's children and their heirs." Effect of the Rule in Shelley’s Case? None. Remainder is in “children” not heirs.

  48. (Q)b:Johnny “to Jay for life, then to Jay's heirs if Jay survives David." Effect of the Rule in Shelley’s Case?

  49. (Q)b:Johnny “to Jay for life, then to Jay's heirs if Jay survives David." Effect of the Rule in Shelley’s Case? To Jay for life, then to Jay, if Jay survives David.

  50. (Q)c:Cher "to Chastity for 100 years if she so long live, then to Chastity's heirs." Effect of the Rule in Shelley’s Case?

More Related