Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Under the common law such restraints are void as against the public policy of allowing landowners to freely dispose of their property. Perhaps the ultimate restraint on alienation was the fee tail, a form of ownership which required that property be passed down in the same family from generation to generation, which has also been widely ...
Justice Shaw reasoned the Massachusetts statute was, "not an appropriation of the property to a public use, but the restraint of an injurious private use by the owner, and is therefore not within the principle of property taken under the right of eminent domain."
In property law, alienation is the voluntary act of an owner of some property to dispose of the property. Alienability is the quality of being alienable , i.e., the capacity for a piece of property or a property right to be sold or otherwise transferred from one party to another.
However, while a violation of the rule against perpetuities is also a violation of the rule against unreasonable restraints on alienation, the reciprocal is not true. [5] As one has stated, "The rule against perpetuities is an ancient, but still vital, rule of property law intended to enhance marketability of property interests by limiting ...
The Rule in Shelley's Case is a rule of law that may apply to certain future interests in real property and trusts created in common law jurisdictions. [1]: 181 It was applied as early as 1366 in The Provost of Beverly's Case [1]: 182 [2] but in its present form is derived from Shelley's Case (1581), [3] in which counsel stated the rule as follows:
However, while a violation of the rule against perpetuities is also a violation of the rule against unreasonable restraints on alienation, the reciprocal is not true. [3] As one has stated, "The rule against perpetuities is an ancient, but still vital, rule of property law intended to enhance marketability of property interests by limiting ...
Tyson’s ex-husband Tom Oddo sued Tyson in 2000, winning what was then a record judgment of $1.4 million in an alienation of affection lawsuit. In 2003, an appeals court knocked the decision down ...
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?