![]() | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
Property law |
---|
![]() |
Part of the common law series |
Types |
Acquisition |
Estates in land |
Conveyancing |
Future use control |
Nonpossessory interest |
Related topics |
Other common law areas |
Higher category: Law and Common law |
The Rule in Wild's Case is a common law rule of construction dating back to 1599 concerning a particular type of ambiguity in devises (such as grants or bequests) of real property: If a grantor (O) grants, by deed or will, property to another person (A) with the language "To A and her children", who gets lawful possession of the property?
The rule resolves this ambiguity as follows:
This rule has fallen into disuse in those jurisdictions which no longer recognize the fee tail as a legal estate. Some U.S. states ignore the rule altogether, and interpret such a grant as giving a life estate and creating a remainder in her children. Section 14.2 of the Restatement (Third) of Property repudiates the Rule in Wild's Case, suggesting that many authorities consider it to be obsolete.
Dukeminier, Jesse, Johansen, Stanley M., Lindgren, James, and Sitkoff, Robert. Wills, Trusts, and Estates, 7th Edition, p. 664. Aspen Publishers, 2005. ISBN 0-7355-3695-3
wikipedians
This is the start of the #wikipedians chat. #wikipedians — chat for Wikipedians about leveraging the hub to improve its root Wikipedia article.