Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz: Present Estates

20 questions · exam conditions

0:00

Present EstatesQuestion 1 of 20

Your client's father recently died, and his will devised the family home as follows: "To my wife for life, and upon her death, to my son if he has reached the age of 25." At the time of the father's death, the wife is 60 years old and the son is 22. Your client, the son, wants to know what interest he has in the family home.

What is the son's interest in the family home? Select one.

A vested remainder, because he is a known person and his interest will become possessory upon the natural termination of the life estate.

No interest, because the gift is void as it may not vest within the Rule Against Perpetuities.

An executory interest, because his interest will divest the life estate of his mother.

A contingent remainder, because his interest is subject to a condition precedent.

← Back to quizzes

Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz

Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz: Present Estates

Practice Present 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 Present 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 son's interest in the family home? Select one.

A vested remainder, because he is a known person and his interest will become possessory upon the natural termination of the life estate.
No interest, because the gift is void as it may not vest within the Rule Against Perpetuities.
An executory interest, because his interest will divest the life estate of his mother.
A contingent remainder, because his interest is subject to a condition precedent. (correct answer)

Explanation: When analyzing future interests in property, you need to distinguish between different types based on whether conditions must be met and how the interest becomes possessory. The son has a contingent remainder because his interest is subject to a condition precedent - he must reach age 25 before his mother's death to inherit the property. A remainder is contingent when it's given to an ascertained person but is subject to a condition precedent, or when it's given to unascertained persons. Here, while the son is known, his right to inherit depends entirely on satisfying the age requirement before the life estate terminates. Answer A is incorrect because a vested remainder requires no conditions - the interest would automatically become possessory upon the life tenant's death. The age requirement prevents this from being vested. Answer B misapplies the Rule Against Perpetuities. Since the son is a life in being at the testator's death, we'll know within his lifetime (certainly within 21 years after his death) whether the condition is satisfied. The interest will either vest or fail well within the perpetuities period. Answer C confuses executory interests with remainders. An executory interest cuts short or divests a prior estate, while a remainder takes effect upon the natural termination of the preceding estate. The son's interest doesn't cut short the mother's life estate - it only becomes possessory when her life estate naturally ends. Remember: contingent remainders have strings attached, while vested remainders are guaranteed to become possessory upon the prior estate's natural termination.

Question 2

You are representing a client who recently inherited a large parcel of undeveloped land. The deed under which the decedent acquired title states that the conveyance was made "to the decedent for the purpose of establishing a wildlife sanctuary, and should the land cease to be used as such, the grantor reserves the right to re-enter and take possession." Your client wants to know what kind of title he holds. Courts in the jurisdiction follow the common law preference for construing ambiguous conveyances as creating a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent rather than a fee simple determinable.

Based on the deed language and the jurisdiction's rule of construction, what estate does your client most likely hold? Select one.

A fee simple determinable, due to the "should the land cease to be used" language.
A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, due to the "right to re-enter" language. (correct answer)
A fee simple absolute, because the purpose language is merely precatory.
An easement for conservation purposes over the land.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. The deed contains language characteristic of both a fee simple determinable ("should the land cease to be used") and a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent ("right to re-enter"). When the language is ambiguous, courts express a preference for the construction that avoids automatic forfeiture. The FSSCS requires the grantor to take an affirmative step to terminate the estate, making it less likely to be forfeited. The explicit reservation of a "right to re-enter" is strong evidence of an FSSCS, and this aligns with the jurisdiction's stated preference. A is incorrect because, despite some durational phrasing, the explicit right of entry and the judicial preference weigh heavily in favor of an FSSCS. C is incorrect because the language is more than just a statement of motive (precatory); it clearly attaches a condition to the ownership of the land. D is incorrect as the deed conveys a possessory estate in the land, not merely a right to use it for a specific purpose like an easement.

Question 3

You are advising a charitable foundation that received a bequest in a will: "I give my beachfront property to the Foundation, on the condition that it is used as a retreat for inner-city youth. If it is ever used for any other purpose, my nephew or his heirs shall have the power to terminate the Foundation's interest." The Foundation operated the retreat for 30 years. Now, facing high maintenance costs, the Foundation wants to sell the property to a hotel developer. The nephew is deceased, but his only child is alive.

What is the most accurate description of the Foundation's estate in the beachfront property? Select one.

A fee simple absolute, because the condition is void under the Rule Against Perpetuities.
A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, with the power of termination held by the nephew's child.
A fee simple determinable, with a possibility of reverter in the testator's estate.
A fee simple subject to an executory limitation, with an executory interest held by the nephew's child. (correct answer)

Explanation: The correct answer is D. The bequest created a fee simple in the Foundation that is subject to a condition. Upon breach of that condition, a future interest is created in a third party (the nephew or his heirs). This structure creates a fee simple subject to an executory limitation in the Foundation and an executory interest in the nephew and his heirs. The language "power to terminate" sounds like a right of entry, but because the interest is held by a third party rather than the grantor's estate, it is properly classified as an executory interest. A is incorrect. While an executory interest may violate the Rule Against Perpetuities, one created in a specific person (the nephew) and his heirs is often valid. Furthermore, many jurisdictions have a statutory exception to RAP for interests following a grant to a charity. B is incorrect because a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent creates a right of entry (power of termination) in the grantor or the grantor's heirs, not in a third party. C is incorrect because the language is conditional ("on the condition that"), not durational ("so long as"), and the future interest is in a third party, not the testator's estate.

Question 4

A testator's will included the following provision: "I devise my farm, Blackacre, to my son, on the express condition that he never permit the sale of alcohol on the premises. If this condition is breached, my daughter shall have the right to enter and terminate my son's estate." The will was probated, and the son took possession of Blackacre. Five years later, the son opened a restaurant on the farm that serves wine and beer.

At the moment the will became effective, what estate did the son receive in Blackacre? Select one.

A fee simple determinable.
A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent.
A fee simple subject to an executory limitation. (correct answer)
A fee simple absolute, because the condition is an illegal restraint of trade.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. This conveyance creates a fee simple subject to an executory limitation. When a defeasible fee is created such that, upon the happening of a stated event, the estate automatically passes to a third party (not the grantor), the third party holds an executory interest, and the present estate is a fee simple subject to an executory limitation. A is incorrect because a fee simple determinable involves an automatic reversion of the estate to the grantor, not a transfer to a third party. B is incorrect because a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent gives the grantor a right of entry, which is not automatic. Here, the interest passes to a third party, the daughter, making her interest an executory interest. D is incorrect because a condition restricting the sale of alcohol on a specific property is a valid use restriction and not considered an illegal restraint of trade.

Question 5

An owner of a large estate conveyed a portion of it to a university by a deed stating the property was transferred "to the University, its successors and assigns, provided that the property is used for academic purposes. Should this condition be broken, the grantor reserves a right of entry." The owner later died, and his will devised all his real property interests to a museum. Years later, the university leased the property to a technology startup for use as its corporate headquarters. The museum has now sued to reclaim the property.

Who holds the right of entry over the university's parcel? Select one.

The museum, because the right of entry was devisable. (correct answer)
The original owner's intestate heirs, because a right of entry cannot be devised.
The state, under the doctrine of cy pres.
No one, because the right of entry was extinguished when the original owner died.

Explanation: The correct answer is A. The deed created a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, with the owner retaining a right of entry (also called a power of termination). At common law, this interest was not alienable inter vivos but was descendible to the grantor's heirs. The modern trend, followed in most jurisdictions, is that rights of entry are devisable by will and may also be alienable inter vivos. Therefore, the owner could, and did, devise the right of entry to the museum in his will. B is incorrect because it reflects the old common law rule that is no longer followed in most states. Under the modern view, a right of entry is devisable. C is incorrect because cy pres is a doctrine for reforming charitable trusts, which is not applicable here. D is incorrect because a right of entry is not a personal right that expires on death; it is a property interest that can be inherited or devised.

Question 6

A warranty deed conveys a parcel of land from a grantor "to my nephew for his personal use and occupancy during his lifetime." The nephew lived on the property for five years and then, upon accepting a job in another country, leased the property to a tenant for a two-year term. The grantor has now brought an action to eject the tenant, claiming the nephew's estate terminated.

What estate does the nephew hold in the property? Select one.

A standard life estate, which allows him to lease the property to others.
A license to occupy the property, which was revoked when he moved away.
A fee simple absolute, because the restriction to personal use is unenforceable.
A determinable life estate, which terminated when he ceased to personally occupy it. (correct answer)

Explanation: When you encounter property law questions involving conditional language, pay close attention to the specific terms used in the conveyance. The phrase "for his personal use and occupancy during his lifetime" creates both a duration limitation (lifetime) and a use restriction (personal use and occupancy). This language creates a determinable life estate. Unlike a standard life estate that lasts for the nephew's entire lifetime regardless of his actions, a determinable life estate automatically terminates when the specified condition is violated. Here, the condition requires the nephew's personal use and occupancy. When he leased the property to a tenant and moved to another country, he ceased personally using and occupying the land, causing his estate to terminate automatically. Answer A is incorrect because a standard life estate would only end upon the nephew's death, regardless of whether he personally occupied the property. The restrictive language here creates something more limited than a standard life estate. Answer B mischaracterizes the nephew's interest. A license is merely permission to use land and doesn't create a property interest, whereas the nephew received an actual estate in land through the warranty deed. Answer C is wrong because use restrictions in life estates are generally enforceable when clearly stated, as they are here. The nephew doesn't hold fee simple absolute since his interest is limited both by duration (his lifetime) and by the use restriction. Remember: When you see qualifying language like "for [specific purpose]" in property conveyances, consider whether it creates a determinable estate that ends automatically when the condition is breached.

Question 7

Who holds the right of entry over the university's parcel? Select one.

The museum, because the right of entry was devisable. (correct answer)
The original owner's intestate heirs, because a right of entry cannot be devised.
The state, under the doctrine of cy pres.
No one, because the right of entry was extinguished when the original owner died.

Question 8

A landowner properly executed and delivered a deed conveying a five-acre parcel of land "to the local school district, so long as the property is used for educational purposes." For 20 years, the school district operated an elementary school on the parcel. Due to shifting demographics, the district closed the school and now plans to sell the property to a commercial developer to build a shopping center. The landowner's sole heir has learned of the plan and has informed the district that she now owns the property.

What present possessory estate does the school district currently hold in the parcel of land? Select one.

A fee simple absolute, because the restriction on use is an invalid restraint on alienation.
A fee simple determinable, which terminated automatically when the district ceased using the property for educational purposes. (correct answer)
A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, which the heir must act to terminate by exercising a right of entry.
A life estate, because the duration of the district's ownership was limited by a specific use.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. The language "so long as" creates a fee simple determinable. This estate is limited by a specific duration, and if the stated event occurs (in this case, the cessation of use for educational purposes), the estate automatically terminates and reverts to the grantor or their heirs. The landowner's heir now holds the property in fee simple absolute. A is incorrect because a restriction on the use of land in a defeasible fee is not considered an invalid restraint on alienation. C is incorrect because language of duration like "so long as" creates a fee simple determinable, not a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent. The latter is created by conditional language such as "on the condition that" or "provided that," and termination is not automatic. D is incorrect because the estate's duration is tied to a condition, not the life of a person, which is the hallmark of a life estate.

Question 9

A farmer conveyed a ten-acre field by deed "to the Town, on condition that the land be maintained as a public athletic field. In the event the land is not so maintained, the grantor or his heirs may re-enter and possess the land." For 15 years, the Town maintained several baseball diamonds on the field. Last year, the Town built a public library on one acre of the field. The farmer died shortly after the original conveyance, and his sole heir lives in another state. The heir has not taken any action regarding the construction of the library.

What is the Town's current interest in the one-acre portion where the library was built? Select one.

A fee simple absolute, because the heir's inaction constituted a waiver.
The Town has no interest, as its estate automatically terminated when the condition was breached.
A fee simple subject to the heir's power of termination. (correct answer)
A fee simple absolute, because building a public library is consistent with a public athletic field.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. The language "on condition that" coupled with a "right to re-enter" creates a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent (FSSCS). Upon breach of the condition, the estate does not automatically terminate. The holder of the right of entry (the heir) must take affirmative action to end the estate, such as by making a formal entry or bringing a lawsuit. Until the heir acts, the Town continues to hold the estate, which remains subject to the condition. Mere inaction does not extinguish the right of entry, although it may be subject to a statute of limitations or laches. A is incorrect because waiver of a right of entry is not typically presumed from mere passage of time or inaction. B is incorrect because termination is not automatic for an FSSCS, unlike a fee simple determinable. D is incorrect because building a library is not consistent with maintaining the land as an athletic field, thus the condition was breached.

Question 10

What is the son's interest in the family home? Select one.

A vested remainder, because he is a known person and his interest will become possessory upon the natural termination of the life estate.
No interest, because the gift is void as it may not vest within the Rule Against Perpetuities.
An executory interest, because his interest will divest the life estate of his mother.
A contingent remainder, because his interest is subject to a condition precedent. (correct answer)

Question 11

A mother's will devised a house "to my son, so long as he remains unmarried, and if he marries, then to my daughter." The son lived in the house for ten years as a bachelor. He then married. The daughter immediately demanded possession of the house.

What was the estate created in the son by the will? Select one.

A fee simple absolute, because the condition is an unreasonable restraint on marriage.
A life estate determinable, because the condition terminates his possessory interest.
A fee simple subject to an executory limitation. (correct answer)
A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. The son's estate is a fee simple subject to an executory limitation. It is a fee simple because it has the potential to last forever (if he never marries). It is subject to a limitation because upon the happening of a specified event (his marriage), the estate automatically shifts to a third party (the daughter). The daughter's interest is an executory interest. A is incorrect. While a general restraint on marriage is against public policy, a partial restraint, such as one that terminates an interest upon marriage, is often upheld, particularly when its purpose is seen as providing support until the person marries. It is not an absolute prohibition. Therefore, the condition is likely valid. B is incorrect because the grant is not limited to the son's life; it's a fee simple that is defeasible. D is incorrect because the interest shifts automatically to a third party, not back to the grantor's estate via a right of entry.

Question 12

What is the most accurate description of the Foundation's estate in the beachfront property? Select one.

A fee simple absolute, because the condition is void under the Rule Against Perpetuities.
A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, with the power of termination held by the nephew's child.
A fee simple determinable, with a possibility of reverter in the testator's estate.
A fee simple subject to an executory limitation, with an executory interest held by the nephew's child. (correct answer)

Question 13

A developer sold a lot in a residential subdivision. The deed included a provision stating, "The grantee, his heirs and assigns, covenant and agree to use the lot for single-family residential purposes only, and in the event of a breach, the developer shall be entitled to $50,000 in liquidated damages." The grantee built a small law office on the lot. The developer sued, seeking to have the grantee's title forfeited.

What is the likely result of the developer's lawsuit for forfeiture? Select one.

The developer will fail, because the deed provision created a restrictive covenant, not a defeasible fee. (correct answer)
The developer will succeed, because the grantee's estate was a fee simple determinable.
The developer will succeed, because the grantee's action breached a condition subsequent.
The developer will fail, because the liquidated damages clause is an unenforceable penalty.

Explanation: This question tests your ability to distinguish between different types of property interests and restrictions. When you see language in a deed that restricts land use, you need to carefully analyze the specific wording to determine what type of legal interest was created. The correct answer is A because the deed provision creates a restrictive covenant, not a defeasible fee estate. The key indicators are: (1) the language uses "covenant and agree," which is classic covenant terminology, and (2) the provision specifies a monetary remedy ($50,000 in liquidated damages) rather than automatic forfeiture. Restrictive covenants are promises about land use that don't affect the title itself - they're contractual obligations that can be enforced through damages or injunctions, but breach doesn't cause the grantee to lose ownership. Answer B is wrong because a fee simple determinable requires specific "durational" language like "so long as," "while," or "until." The deed here doesn't contain such language. Answer C is incorrect because a condition subsequent would need language like "provided that" or "on condition that," followed by a right of entry clause. While there's a use restriction, there's no language creating a condition that would terminate the estate. Answer D is wrong because the liquidated damages clause isn't necessarily unenforceable - the issue is that the developer is seeking forfeiture, not damages. Remember: Focus on the exact wording in property restrictions. "Covenant" language creates contractual obligations, while durational or conditional language creates defeasible fees. The remedy specified often reveals the drafter's intent about what type of restriction was created.

Question 14

In a jurisdiction that has statutorily converted the common law fee tail into a fee simple absolute, a landowner executed a deed conveying a large tract of land "to my daughter and the heirs of her body." The daughter is married but has no children. She now wishes to sell the tract of land to a developer.

What estate does the daughter hold in the tract of land? Select one.

A fee tail, which she can only convey for the duration of her life.
A life estate, with a remainder in her unborn children.
A fee simple absolute. (correct answer)
A fee simple determinable, which will end if she dies without issue.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. The language "to my daughter and the heirs of her body" creates a common law fee tail. However, the vast majority of jurisdictions have abolished this estate by statute. The most common statutory reform is to convert what would have been a fee tail into a fee simple absolute. Therefore, the daughter holds the land in fee simple absolute and can freely convey it. A is incorrect because the fee tail has been statutorily abolished in the jurisdiction. B is another common statutory alternative for handling a fee tail, but the problem specifies the jurisdiction converts it to a fee simple absolute. D is incorrect because the language does not create a defeasible fee that depends on her having issue; it creates a fee tail, which is handled by the statute.

Question 15

Based on the deed language and the jurisdiction's rule of construction, what estate does your client most likely hold? Select one.

A fee simple determinable, due to the "should the land cease to be used" language.
A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, due to the "right to re-enter" language. (correct answer)
A fee simple absolute, because the purpose language is merely precatory.
An easement for conservation purposes over the land.

Question 16

What present possessory estate does the school district currently hold in the parcel of land? Select one.

A fee simple absolute, because the restriction on use is an invalid restraint on alienation.
A fee simple determinable, which terminated automatically when the district ceased using the property for educational purposes. (correct answer)
A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, which the heir must act to terminate by exercising a right of entry.
A life estate, because the duration of the district's ownership was limited by a specific use.

Question 17

A property owner conveyed a warehouse in a deed stating: "to my business partner for the life of my eldest son." The business partner took possession of the warehouse. One year later, the business partner died, leaving a will that devised all of his property to his wife. The property owner's eldest son is still alive.

Who is entitled to possession of the warehouse following the business partner's death? Select one.

The original property owner.
The business partner's wife. (correct answer)
The property owner's eldest son.
The business partner's intestate heirs.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. The conveyance created a life estate pur autre vie—a life estate measured by the life of a third person (the eldest son). This type of estate does not terminate upon the death of the life tenant (the business partner). Instead, it is an asset that can be devised by will or pass through intestacy until the measuring life (the eldest son) ends. Because the business partner devised all his property to his wife, she now holds the life estate pur autre vie for the remainder of the son's life. A is incorrect because the original owner's reversionary interest does not become possessory until the measuring life (the son) ends. C is incorrect because the son is merely the measuring life; he has no possessory rights in the property. D is incorrect because the business partner had a valid will devising the property to his wife, so the rules of intestacy do not apply.

Question 18

A landowner conveyed a parcel of land "to a local hunting club, its successors and assigns, for so long as the premises are used for recreational hunting." The landowner subsequently died, and his sole heir inherited his remaining property. The club later granted a timber company the right to harvest all of the mature trees on the parcel, which would make the land unsuitable for hunting for at least a decade. The heir has brought an action to quiet title.

Who has superior title to the parcel of land? Select one.

The hunting club, because it still holds title until the heir exercises a right of entry.
The heir, because the club's estate automatically terminated when it ceased to be used for recreational hunting. (correct answer)
The hunting club, because harvesting timber is a form of recreational use of the land.
The timber company, because it acquired its rights before the club's estate was terminated.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. The conveyance "for so long as" created a fee simple determinable in the hunting club, with the landowner retaining a possibility of reverter. When the landowner died, the possibility of reverter passed to his heir. The act of allowing the land to be logged, making it unsuitable for hunting, caused the stated condition to be violated. With a fee simple determinable, the estate terminates automatically upon the breach of the condition, and title immediately and automatically reverts to the holder of the possibility of reverter (the heir). A is incorrect because this describes the rule for a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, not a fee simple determinable. C is incorrect because clear-cutting timber is not recreational hunting and, in fact, prevents that use. D is incorrect because any interest the timber company acquired from the club was subject to the same limitation. Once the club's estate terminated, the timber company's rights, which were carved out of that estate, were also extinguished.

Question 19

In his will, a father devised his vacation cabin "to my daughter, provided, however, that if she should ever attempt to sell or mortgage the property during her lifetime, the cabin shall pass to my son." The daughter, needing to finance a business venture, took out a mortgage on the cabin from a local bank.

What is the daughter's interest in the cabin at the time the will takes effect? Select one.

A life estate, because she cannot freely alienate the property.
A fee simple absolute, because the condition is an invalid disabling restraint on alienation.
A fee simple subject to an executory limitation. (correct answer)
A fee simple subject to a condition subsequent.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. The language of the devise creates a fee simple subject to an executory limitation. The daughter receives a fee simple, but it is subject to a condition (attempting to sell or mortgage). If the condition occurs, the property automatically passes to a third party, the son, whose future interest is an executory interest. While this condition is a forfeiture restraint on alienation, such restraints are sometimes upheld, particularly when they are limited in duration and apply to a fee simple. A is incorrect because the grant does not use language limiting the estate to the daughter's life. B is incorrect. While the condition is a restraint on alienation, it is a forfeiture restraint ("the cabin shall pass to my son"), not a disabling restraint ("any attempt to sell is void"). Courts are more likely to void disabling restraints than forfeiture restraints on a fee simple. Therefore, the condition is likely valid and creates a defeasible fee. D is incorrect because the future interest is held by a third party (the son), not the grantor's estate, which is the defining feature of a fee simple subject to an executory limitation rather than a condition subsequent.

Question 20

A valid will devised a testator's entire estate, including a commercial property, "to my wife for life, with full power to sell or dispose of the property as she sees fit. Upon my wife's death, any remaining property shall go to our children in equal shares." The wife, wishing to help one of her children with a down payment on a house, decides to give the commercial property to that child as a gift.

What is the wife's interest in the commercial property? Select one.

A fee simple absolute, because she has an unlimited power of disposition.
A life estate, but her power of disposition includes the power to make an inter vivos gift of the property. (correct answer)
A life estate, and her power of disposition is limited to sales for her own support and maintenance.
A trust, in which she is both the trustee and the life beneficiary.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. The wife has a life estate coupled with a power of disposition. The language explicitly grants her the estate "for life" but adds a power to dispose of it. Courts interpret the scope of such a power based on the specific language used. "Full power to sell or dispose of the property as she sees fit" is broad language that is generally construed to include the power to make an inter vivos gift, not just to sell for consideration. The gift to the children is a remainder that applies only to whatever property is left when the wife dies. A is incorrect. Even with a broad power of disposition, the explicit "for life" language prevents the estate from being a fee simple absolute. The existence of the remainder interest in the children confirms this. C is incorrect because the language "as she sees fit" is much broader than language limiting the power to what is necessary for her support. Courts require specific limiting language to construe the power that narrowly. D is incorrect because while the arrangement has some trust-like features, the language of the will creates legal estates (a life estate and a remainder), not an equitable trust.