
Hosted by T-Bone · EN
Taylor's law school outlines and notes come to life in this AI-generated podcast.

The Rule Against PerpetuitiesMost important rule favoring alienability. More broadly applicable than the other rules and still survives in most jurisdictions.The rule only applies to these types of interests:Contingent RemaindersExecutory InterestsVested Remainders in Open ClassOption and similar contracts. The rule does not apply to:Future interests created in the grantor (reversions, possibilities of reverter, rights of entry)Vested interests not in an open class created in the grantee (Indefeasibly vested remainders, vested remainders subject to divestment)Classic rule statement (with insertions): No interest [subject to the Rule] is good unless it must vest [in a closed class], if at all, no later than 21 years after some life in being at the creation of the interest.

The Rule Against PerpetuitiesMost important rule favoring alienability. More broadly applicable than the other rules and still survives in most jurisdictions.The rule only applies to these types of interests: 1. Contingent Remainders 2. Executory Interests 3. Vested Remainders in Open Class 4. Option and similar contracts.The rule does not apply to: • Future interests created in the grantor (reversions, possibilities of reverter, rights of entry) • Vested interests not in an open class created in the grantee (Indefeasibly vested remainders, vested remainders subject to divestment)Classic rule statement (with insertions): No interest [subject to the Rule] is good unless it must vest [in a closed class], if at all, no later than 21 years after some life in being at the creation of the interest.

Finally, all of Module 2 Class 1

Classifying Present and Future InterestsClassification: going through a conveyance interest by interest and identifying each in turn.

Future Interests

Present Interests

Possession of Real Property

Incidents, Bailments, Finding

Exam time is here! Let's do this!

3 Step Analysis to § 1367:Does §1367 give supplemental jurisdiction?Common nucleus of operative facts? (Gibbs)Does 1367(b) take it away?Is original jurisdiction founded solely on diversity under § 1332?Is it a claim by plaintiff against person made party under Rule 14, 19, 20, or 24? OR Is it a claim by a person to be joined as plaintiff under Rule 19 or intervene as plaintiff under Rule 24?Would supplemental jurisdiction be inconsistent with requirements of § 1332?[If "yes" to all 3, then §1367(b) takes it away]Should the court exercise discretion to decline under § 1367(c)?