Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz: Life Estates

20 questions · exam conditions

0:00

Life EstatesQuestion 1 of 20

A woman granted a parcel of undeveloped land "to my brother for life, remainder to his eldest daughter." The land is located in a rural area and contains a large deposit of commercially valuable gravel. Before the grant, the woman had never commercially extracted gravel from the property. The brother, seeking to generate income, entered into a contract with a construction company to excavate and sell the gravel. The brother's eldest daughter has filed suit to enjoin the excavation.

What is the likely outcome of the daughter's suit? Select one.

The injunction will be granted, because a life tenant may not exploit the natural resources on the property if the land was not used for that purpose prior to the grant.

The injunction will be granted, because a life tenant is only entitled to the ordinary rents and profits from the land, not the proceeds from the sale of the land itself.

The injunction will be denied, because a life tenant is permitted to make reasonable use of the property to generate income.

The injunction will be denied, but the brother must share the net profits from the gravel sales with the daughter as cotenants of the mineral estate.

← Back to quizzes

Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz

Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz: Life Estates

Practice Life Estates in Bar Exam (Uniform) with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Life Estates, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Bar Exam (Uniform).

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

What is the likely outcome of the daughter's suit? Select one.

The injunction will be granted, because a life tenant may not exploit the natural resources on the property if the land was not used for that purpose prior to the grant. (correct answer)
The injunction will be granted, because a life tenant is only entitled to the ordinary rents and profits from the land, not the proceeds from the sale of the land itself.
The injunction will be denied, because a life tenant is permitted to make reasonable use of the property to generate income.
The injunction will be denied, but the brother must share the net profits from the gravel sales with the daughter as cotenants of the mineral estate.

Explanation: The correct answer is A. This scenario involves the 'open mines' doctrine. A life tenant may only exploit natural resources (like minerals, oil, or gravel) if the property was already being used for that purpose when the life estate was created. Since the grantor had never commercially extracted gravel, the brother's (the life tenant's) new exploitation constitutes affirmative waste. Therefore, the remainderman (the daughter) can enjoin this activity. (B) is a true statement but less precise than (A); the specific rule about exploiting natural resources is the dispositive issue. (C) is incorrect because exploiting depletable resources is generally not considered 'reasonable use' for a life tenant unless the open mines doctrine applies. (D) is incorrect because the parties are not cotenants, and the brother has no right to the profits from this new exploitation.

Question 2

An owner of a commercial building conveyed it "to a tenant for life, remainder to a charity." The building was fully insured under a policy paid for solely by the tenant. A fire, not caused by any fault of the tenant, destroyed the building. The insurance company paid the full policy proceeds to the tenant.

Which party is entitled to the insurance proceeds? Select one.

The tenant is entitled to the entire amount of the proceeds. (correct answer)
The charity is entitled to the entire amount of the proceeds, which it must hold in trust for the tenant's benefit during her life.
The proceeds must be apportioned between the tenant and the charity based on the present value of their respective interests.
The proceeds must be used to rebuild the commercial building for the benefit of both parties.

Explanation: The correct answer is A. Unless there is an agreement to the contrary, a life tenant has no duty to insure the premises for the benefit of the remainderman. Insurance is a personal contract of indemnity. Since the tenant paid the premiums for her own benefit, she is entitled to keep the full proceeds of the policy. The charity, as the remainderman, has no claim to the proceeds unless the conveying instrument or a separate agreement required the tenant to insure the property for the charity's benefit. (B), (C), and (D) represent alternative outcomes that would apply only if there were such a duty or agreement, which is not stated in the facts.

Question 3

A deed conveyed a property "to my niece for life, remainder to her children who survive her." At the time of the conveyance, the niece had one son. The niece, wanting to provide a home for her son and his family, built a second small house on the property. Years later, the niece died and was survived by her son and a daughter, who was born after the second house was built. The son claims exclusive ownership of the second house because it was built for him.

Who owns the second house? Select one.

The son, because the house was built for his benefit and became his personal property.
The son and daughter as tenants in common, because the house is a fixture that became part of the real property. (correct answer)
The original grantor's estate, because the niece committed waste by building an unauthorized structure.
The son, under the doctrine of adverse possession against his mother and sister.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. A house is a fixture that becomes part of the real property. When the niece (the life tenant) built the second house, it became part of the estate. The remainder interest was granted to the niece's children who survived her, which is a class gift. The class closed at the niece's death. Both the son and daughter survived her, so they take the remainder interest as tenants in common. Their interest includes the entire property, including all improvements made by the life tenant. (A) is incorrect because the niece's intent does not sever the house from the realty. (C) is incorrect because building the house was likely ameliorative waste, which is not typically actionable if value is increased, and even if it were, the remedy would not be forfeiture to the grantor. (D) is incorrect because the son's possession was not hostile; he was there with the permission of the life tenant.

Question 4

You are advising a bank on a potential loan. A customer has applied for a home equity line of credit to be secured by his residence. A title search reveals that the customer holds only a life estate in the property, with the remainder interest held by his two adult children. The customer is the sole applicant for the loan and states his children are unwilling to co-sign or encumber their interest.

What is the primary risk to the bank if it issues the loan secured only by the customer's interest? Select one.

The loan would be void because a life estate cannot serve as collateral for a mortgage.
If the customer defaults, the bank's only recourse would be to garnish the customer's other assets.
The bank could be liable to the remaindermen for waste if the loan proceeds are not used for property improvements.
The bank's security interest in the property would be extinguished upon the customer's death. (correct answer)

Explanation: This question tests your understanding of life estates and how they affect secured lending. When you encounter property law questions involving different types of ownership interests, always identify what type of estate or interest each party holds and how that affects their rights. A life estate gives the holder (called the life tenant) the right to use and enjoy the property during their lifetime, but this interest automatically terminates when they die. At that point, the property passes to the remaindermen—here, the customer's children. This fundamental characteristic creates the primary risk for the bank. Answer D correctly identifies this core issue: the bank's security interest would be extinguished upon the customer's death because the life estate itself ends at that moment. The bank would have no claim against the property once it passes to the remaindermen, leaving the loan potentially unsecured. Answer A is wrong because life estates can serve as collateral—they represent a valuable property interest that can be mortgaged. Answer B incorrectly suggests the bank has no property recourse upon default. While the customer lives, the bank could foreclose on the life estate interest, though this would be of limited value to potential buyers. Answer C misunderstands waste liability—the bank wouldn't be liable to remaindermen for waste based solely on how loan proceeds are used. Study tip: Remember that any interest in real property is only as durable as the underlying estate. Life estates create inherent risks for lenders because the collateral has a built-in expiration date—the life tenant's death.

Question 5

A testator's will devised a parcel of land "to my friend for life, with full power to sell or mortgage the fee simple, and any portion of the property not sold or mortgaged at my friend's death shall pass to my niece." The friend lived on the property for several years without selling it. The friend then died, leaving a will that purported to devise the property to her own son.

Who is the owner of the property? Select one.

The friend's son, because the power to sell included the power to devise.
The friend's son, because the broad power to sell elevated the friend's life estate to a fee simple.
The testator's heirs, because the gift to the niece was invalid as it was repugnant to the power of sale.
The niece, because the friend's power to sell had to be exercised during her lifetime. (correct answer)

Explanation: This question tests your understanding of powers of appointment in property law, specifically the distinction between powers that must be exercised during the holder's lifetime versus those that can be exercised by will. The testator created a life estate in the friend with a special power to "sell or mortgage the fee simple." This language is crucial—it grants the friend the authority to dispose of the entire fee simple interest, but crucially limits this power to specific methods: selling or mortgaging. Since the friend never exercised this power during her lifetime, the remainder interest passes to the niece as specified in the original will. Option A is incorrect because a power to sell does not automatically include the power to devise by will. These are distinct legal concepts—selling involves a transaction with consideration during one's lifetime, while devising transfers property at death without consideration. Option B misunderstands the legal effect of broad powers. Even an extensive power to sell doesn't automatically convert a life estate into a fee simple; the friend still held only a life estate with an additional power. Option C incorrectly applies the doctrine of repugnancy. The gift to the niece isn't repugnant to the power of sale—both can coexist, with the niece taking whatever remains if the power isn't exercised. Remember this key distinction: unless a power explicitly includes the right to dispose of property by will, it typically must be exercised during the holder's lifetime. Powers of appointment require precise language, so read the grant carefully to determine exactly what authority was given.

Question 6

An elderly woman conveyed her house to her son, reserving a life estate for herself. The deed was properly executed and recorded. The woman continued to live in the house. A few years later, the woman incurred a large, unsecured debt to a creditor. The woman then died, and the creditor obtained a judgment against her estate. The estate's assets are insufficient to satisfy the judgment. The creditor now seeks to attach and sell the house to satisfy the debt.

Is the creditor likely to succeed in forcing a sale of the house? Select one.

Yes, because the conveyance to the son was a fraudulent transfer intended to avoid the mother's debts.
Yes, because the woman's life estate merges with the son's remainder interest upon her death, making the fee simple available to her creditors.
No, because a homestead exemption protects the property from the claims of the deceased's creditors.
No, because the woman's life estate was extinguished upon her death, leaving no property interest for the creditor to attach. (correct answer)

Explanation: When you encounter property law questions involving life estates and creditor claims, focus on what property interests actually exist at the time the creditor seeks to attach them. The key principle is that creditors can only reach property interests that the debtor actually owns. Here, the woman conveyed the house to her son while reserving only a life estate for herself. This means she retained the right to use and occupy the property during her lifetime, but she no longer owned the underlying fee simple. When she died, her life estate was automatically extinguished by operation of law. Since the debt was incurred after the conveyance, the creditor can only pursue property interests that existed in the woman's estate at her death. Because her life estate terminated upon death, there was no property interest remaining for the creditor to attach. Option A is wrong because there's no indication this was a fraudulent transfer - the woman retained significant value through her life estate and continued living there. Option B misapplies the merger doctrine, which doesn't create new property interests in a deceased person's estate that creditors can reach. The son's remainder interest was always separate from his mother's life estate. Option C incorrectly focuses on homestead exemptions, but this isn't a homestead issue - it's about what property interests are available to creditors. Remember this rule: creditors can only attach property interests that actually exist in the debtor's estate. When a life estate ends at death, it simply vanishes - there's nothing left to attach.

Question 7

A man's will created a trust, providing that his ancestral home be held "for the life of my brother, and upon my brother's death, to be distributed to my then-living grandchildren." The brother, as life tenant, failed to pay the annual property taxes for three consecutive years. The county has now scheduled a tax sale of the property to satisfy the delinquent taxes. The grandchildren, who are the remaindermen, want to prevent the sale.

What is the brother's duty regarding the property taxes? Select one.

He has no duty, as property taxes are an encumbrance on the fee simple and are the responsibility of the remaindermen.
He must pay the property taxes, but only up to the amount of income or profit he actually receives from the property.
He must pay all property taxes regardless of the income or rental value of the property, as it is a personal obligation.
He must pay the property taxes, but his liability is limited to the reasonable rental value of the property. (correct answer)

Explanation: When you encounter a question about life estates and property obligations, focus on the fundamental principle that life tenants must preserve the property for remaindermen while being fairly limited in their financial exposure. A life tenant has a duty to pay property taxes, but this duty is reasonably constrained. The correct rule is that the life tenant's obligation is limited to the reasonable rental value of the property, regardless of whether they actually receive that income. This strikes a fair balance: the life tenant must maintain the property and prevent tax sales that would harm the remaindermen, but their liability won't exceed what the property could reasonably generate. Answer A is wrong because property taxes are indeed the life tenant's responsibility, not the remaindermen's. The life tenant has current possession and must maintain the property. Answer B incorrectly limits the duty to only actual income received. This would be unfair to remaindermen because a life tenant could simply choose not to rent the property and avoid tax obligations entirely. Answer C goes too far in the opposite direction, making the life tenant personally liable for unlimited amounts, which could force them to pay taxes exceeding the property's value. Remember this key distinction: life tenants must pay carrying costs like taxes and basic maintenance, but their exposure is capped at the property's reasonable rental value. This prevents both waste (unpaid taxes leading to foreclosure) and unfair burden on the life tenant. Focus on this "reasonable rental value" standard whenever you see life estate tax questions.

Question 8

A father devised his home, which was subject to a mortgage, "to my daughter for life, remainder to my grandson." The daughter moved into the home. The mortgage requires monthly payments of $2,000, of which $1,500 is interest and $500 is principal. The property has a fair rental value of $2,500 per month. The daughter has been making the full $2,000 mortgage payments.

Which statement best describes the daughter's and grandson's obligations regarding the mortgage payments? Select one.

The daughter is responsible for the full $2,000 payment because the fair rental value exceeds the payment amount.
The grandson is responsible for the full $2,000 payment because the mortgage is an encumbrance on the fee simple estate he will eventually possess.
The daughter is responsible for the $1,500 interest portion, and the grandson is responsible for the $500 principal portion. (correct answer)
The daughter and grandson are equally responsible for the full payment and should each contribute $1,000 per month.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. The established rule for apportioning a mortgage between a life tenant and a remainderman is that the life tenant is responsible for the interest payments, as this is a carrying charge analogous to taxes. The remainderman is responsible for the principal payments, as this reduces the encumbrance and preserves the corpus of the estate for their ultimate benefit. The life tenant's obligation is capped by the income or fair rental value of the property, but that is a limit on their duty, not a rule that reallocates the principal payments to them. (A) misapplies the fair rental value rule; that rule limits the life tenant's liability for carrying costs, it does not obligate them to pay the principal. (B) is incorrect because the life tenant has the current benefit of the property and is responsible for the interest. (D) is incorrect as it does not reflect the legal distinction between interest and principal payments.

Question 9

Which statement best describes the daughter's and grandson's obligations regarding the mortgage payments? Select one.

The daughter is responsible for the full $2,000 payment because the fair rental value exceeds the payment amount.
The grandson is responsible for the full $2,000 payment because the mortgage is an encumbrance on the fee simple estate he will eventually possess.
The daughter is responsible for the $1,500 interest portion, and the grandson is responsible for the $500 principal portion. (correct answer)
The daughter and grandson are equally responsible for the full payment and should each contribute $1,000 per month.

Question 10

A grantor conveyed a ten-acre property with a small house on it "to my daughter for life, and on her death to her children." At the time of the conveyance, the daughter had no children. Subsequently, the daughter had a son. The daughter then sold her life estate to a developer. The developer demolished the small house and built a large apartment complex on the ten acres. Shortly thereafter, the daughter had a second child, a daughter.

Who has standing to sue the developer for waste? Select one.

The son only, because his remainder interest was vested at the time the waste occurred. (correct answer)
Both the son and the daughter, because they are members of the class of remaindermen.
The grantor, because the contingent remainder may fail, causing the property to revert to the grantor.
No one, because the remainder was not vested at the time the developer's actions took place.

Explanation: The correct answer is A. The conveyance created a life estate in the daughter, followed by a remainder in her children. At the time of the conveyance, the remainder was contingent because the daughter had no children. Once the son was born, the remainder vested in him, subject to open to let in later-born children. The waste (demolition and construction) occurred after the son was born but before the daughter was born. A holder of a vested remainder has standing to sue for damages for waste. The daughter, who was not yet born (and thus not in being) when the waste occurred, does not have standing to sue for damages for that past act. While her interest is now vested along with her brother's, it was not at the time of the injury. (C) is incorrect because once the son was born, the grantor's reversionary interest was eliminated. (D) is incorrect because the remainder was vested in the son when the waste happened.

Question 11

A landowner conveyed a tract of forested land "to a friend for life, with the remainder to a local university." The friend, an avid woodworker, began selectively cutting down mature oak trees on the property to use the lumber for his furniture-making business. The friend only harvested trees that were fully grown and did not clear-cut any portion of the land. The university objects to any cutting of timber.

Is the friend's harvesting of the oak trees permissible? Select one.

Yes, because a life tenant is entitled to the normal profits of the land, which includes harvesting timber.
Yes, but only to the extent necessary for repairing structures on the property or for fuel. (correct answer)
No, because any cutting of timber by a life tenant constitutes affirmative waste unless the property was a commercial timber farm.
No, because the cutting of mature trees permanently diminishes the value of the remainder interest.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. A life tenant generally cannot cut timber as it is considered part of the corpus of the estate and doing so constitutes affirmative waste. However, there are exceptions. A life tenant may cut timber for their own use, specifically for repair of existing structures (estovers) or for fuel. They may also cut timber if the land is suitable only for such use (like a tree farm) or if it is necessary to clear the land for cultivation. Here, the friend is using the timber for a commercial business, which exceeds the scope of permissible use. His actions are not for repair or fuel. Therefore, he is committing waste. (A) is incorrect because harvesting timber is not considered a normal 'profit' like annual crops. (C) and (D) are too absolute. While the friend's actions are impermissible, these options don't acknowledge the valid exceptions like cutting for repairs (estovers), which is the most precise framing of the rule.

Question 12

Is the friend's harvesting of the oak trees permissible? Select one.

Yes, because a life tenant is entitled to the normal profits of the land, which includes harvesting timber.
Yes, but only to the extent necessary for repairing structures on the property or for fuel. (correct answer)
No, because any cutting of timber by a life tenant constitutes affirmative waste unless the property was a commercial timber farm.
No, because the cutting of mature trees permanently diminishes the value of the remainder interest.

Question 13

What is the likely outcome of the daughter's suit? Select one.

The injunction will be granted, because a life tenant may not exploit the natural resources on the property if the land was not used for that purpose prior to the grant. (correct answer)
The injunction will be granted, because a life tenant is only entitled to the ordinary rents and profits from the land, not the proceeds from the sale of the land itself.
The injunction will be denied, because a life tenant is permitted to make reasonable use of the property to generate income.
The injunction will be denied, but the brother must share the net profits from the gravel sales with the daughter as cotenants of the mineral estate.

Question 14

What is the primary risk to the bank if it issues the loan secured only by the customer's interest? Select one.

The loan would be void because a life estate cannot serve as collateral for a mortgage.
If the customer defaults, the bank's only recourse would be to garnish the customer's other assets.
The bank could be liable to the remaindermen for waste if the loan proceeds are not used for property improvements.
The bank's security interest in the property would be extinguished upon the customer's death. (correct answer)

Question 15

A mother conveyed a farm "to my son for life." The son, needing funds, obtained a loan from a bank, secured by a mortgage on the farm. The son signed the mortgage documents, but the remaindermen (the mother's other children) did not. The son subsequently defaulted on the loan, and the bank initiated foreclosure proceedings to sell the farm.

What interest can the bank foreclose upon and sell? Select one.

The farm in fee simple, because the bank is a bona fide encumbrancer for value.
The son's life estate only. (correct answer)
The farm in fee simple, but the remaindermen are entitled to the portion of the proceeds exceeding the value of the son's life estate.
No interest, because a life estate is not mortgageable without the consent of the remaindermen.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. A life tenant can transfer, lease, or encumber their specific interest in the property. However, they cannot convey or encumber a greater interest than they own. The son only owned a life estate. Therefore, the mortgage he gave the bank attached only to his life estate. The bank can foreclose, but it can only sell the interest its lien attached to: the son's life estate, which is a life estate pur autre vie (measured by the son's life). (A) and (C) are incorrect because the bank cannot sell the fee simple without the consent and joinder of the remaindermen who own the future interest. (D) is incorrect because a life estate is a property interest that can be mortgaged, although it is not attractive security for a lender precisely because its duration is uncertain.

Question 16

A woman holds a life estate in a property with a house and several outbuildings. The remainder is held by her brother. During a severe hailstorm, the roof of the main house was badly damaged. The woman promptly hired a roofer to make emergency repairs to prevent water damage, at a cost of $5,000. She then had the entire roof replaced at a cost of $25,000. The new roof has a projected lifespan of 30 years. The woman has demanded that her brother contribute to the cost of both the repairs and the replacement.

For which expense is the woman entitled to contribution from her brother? Select one.

The $5,000 for emergency repairs only.
A portion of the $25,000 for the roof replacement. (correct answer)
A portion of both the $5,000 repair and the $25,000 replacement.
Neither expense, as all maintenance and repairs are the sole responsibility of the life tenant.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. A distinction is made between ordinary repairs and permanent improvements. A life tenant is responsible for ordinary repairs (like the emergency patch) and is not entitled to contribution from the remainderman. However, a major replacement that benefits the entire fee simple estate and will outlast the life estate (like a new roof) is considered a capital improvement. For capital improvements, courts will typically apportion the cost between the life tenant and the remainderman based on the relative values of their estates or the life expectancy of the life tenant. (A) is incorrect because emergency repairs fall under the life tenant's duty of ordinary maintenance. (D) is incorrect because it fails to distinguish between ordinary repairs and capital improvements. (C) is incorrect because the emergency repair portion is solely the life tenant's responsibility.

Question 17

Who is the owner of the property? Select one.

The friend's son, because the power to sell included the power to devise.
The friend's son, because the broad power to sell elevated the friend's life estate to a fee simple.
The testator's heirs, because the gift to the niece was invalid as it was repugnant to the power of sale.
The niece, because the friend's power to sell had to be exercised during her lifetime. (correct answer)

Question 18

A testator devised a large historic mansion and its grounds "to my spouse for life, and upon my spouse's death, to my child in fee simple." The spouse, finding the mansion too large and expensive to maintain, moved into a small cottage on the property and boarded up the main house. The spouse refused to make any repairs to the mansion's leaking roof, causing significant water damage to the interior plaster and floors. The child, who holds the remainder interest, has learned of the damage.

What is the child's strongest legal claim against the spouse? Select one.

A claim for affirmative waste, because the spouse's actions actively damaged the property.
A claim for permissive waste, because the spouse failed to make reasonable repairs to protect the property from damage by the elements. (correct answer)
A claim for ameliorative waste, because boarding up the house changed its character and use.
No claim, because the spouse is only obligated to maintain the portion of the property they are actively possessing and using.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. A life tenant has a duty to make ordinary repairs to keep the property in the same condition it was in when the life tenancy began, limited to the extent of income or profits derived from the land. Failure to do so, such as not fixing a leaking roof, constitutes permissive waste. The spouse's failure to act (an omission) led to the damage. (A) is incorrect because affirmative waste involves voluntary conduct that decreases the value of the property, such as demolishing a building; here, the damage resulted from an omission. (C) is incorrect because ameliorative waste involves an affirmative act that changes the property's character but increases its value; boarding up the house is not an improvement. (D) is incorrect because a life tenant's duty to preserve the estate extends to the entire property subject to the life estate, not just the portion they occupy.

Question 19

You are representing a client who holds a life estate in a residential property located in a city. The property includes an old, dilapidated carriage house that is structurally unsound. The neighborhood has undergone significant rezoning, and the property is now in a high-density residential zone. Your client proposes to demolish the carriage house and construct a small, modern duplex in its place, which would significantly increase the property's market value. The remainderman, who lives in another state, objects to the plan.

What is the best advice to give your client regarding her potential liability for waste if she proceeds with the demolition and construction? Select one.

She will be liable for affirmative waste because a life tenant may never demolish a structure on the property without the remainderman's consent.
She will not be liable for waste because her actions are certain to increase the fair market value of the property.
She may avoid liability for waste if a court finds that the changed neighborhood conditions have made the original structure worthless and her plan will not diminish the value of the remainder interest. (correct answer)
She will be liable for permissive waste because she allowed the carriage house to fall into a dilapidated state.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. This question tests the modern exception to the traditional rule against ameliorative waste. While common law strictly prohibited changes to the property's character, the modern trend permits a life tenant to make substantial alterations or even demolish structures if there has been a substantial and permanent change in neighborhood conditions that has rendered the original structure obsolete or unprofitable, and the action does not diminish the value of the remainder. (A) states the old, strict common law rule and is no longer universally applied. (B) is too broad; an increase in value alone is not always sufficient, especially if the character of the property is fundamentally altered against the remainderman's wishes without a change in circumstances. (D) describes permissive waste, which is a failure to repair, not an affirmative act of demolition and construction. The client's potential past permissive waste does not determine her liability for the proposed ameliorative act.

Question 20

An owner conveyed a lakeside cottage "to my friend for life." The friend, who was 70 years old at the time of the conveyance, immediately sold all of her rights in the cottage to a buyer for a lump sum. The buyer began using the cottage as a vacation rental. Five years later, the friend died. The original owner, who holds a reversionary interest, discovered the buyer is still renting out the cottage and demanded that the buyer vacate the property.

What are the buyer's rights to the cottage? Select one.

The buyer has a life estate measured by the buyer's own life.
The buyer has a fee simple interest because the friend conveyed all of her rights in the property.
The buyer's interest in the property terminated upon the friend's death. (correct answer)
The buyer's interest is a tenancy at will, terminable by either the buyer or the original owner at any time.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. A life tenant can convey their interest, but they can only convey what they own. The friend owned a life estate, measured by her own life. When she sold her interest to the buyer, the buyer received a life estate pur autre vie—a life estate measured by the life of another (the friend). Consequently, the buyer's property rights terminated the moment the measuring life (the friend) ended. (A) is incorrect because the life estate was measured by the friend's life, not the buyer's. (B) is incorrect because one cannot convey a greater estate than one has; the friend only had a life estate, not a fee simple. (D) is incorrect because the buyer had a valid life estate pur autre vie until the friend's death, at which point any continued possession would be as a trespasser, not a tenant at will, unless a new agreement was formed with the owner.