- Cover; Title; Copyright; FOREWORD; Contents; INTRODUCTION;
- 1. WHAT THE RULE AGAINST PERPETUITIES IS IN KENTUCKY;
- 1. What the Common Law Rule against Perpetuities Is; A. Lives in being; B. The remote possibilities test;
- 2. The Meaning of ""Vest"": Myth and Reality; A. Vest in possession; B. Indefeasibly vest in interest; C. Vest in interest with possession postponed; D. Vest in interest subject to open (or subject to partial divestment); E. Vest in interest subject to total divestment;
- 2. APPLICATION OF THE RULE AGAINST PERPETUITIES TO VARIOUS INTERESTS;
- 1. Gifts to Classes.
- 2. Powers of Appointmen
- t3. Options;
- 4. Gifts to Charity;
- 5. Trusts for Employees;
- 6. Trusts for Accumulation;
- 7. Consequences of Violating the Rule; A. Preceding estates stand; invalid interest passes by intestacy; B. Preceding estates stand; invalid interest passes to the last person(s) entitled to the income; C. Infectious invalidity; preceding valid estates fall with invalid remainder; D. Reform of invalid interest by cy pres;
- 3. THE TROUBLES CAUSED BY THE STATUTE PROHIBITING SUSPENSION OF THE POWER OF ALIENATION.
- 1. The Meaning of KRS 381.220, Prohibiting Suspension of the Power of Alienation (Applicable to Transfers That Took Effect prior to July 1, 1960
- )2. Is There a Rule Limiting the Duration of Trusts?;
- 4. REFORMS OF THE 1960 PERPETUITIES ACT;
- 1. Why Reform?; A. The Rule against Perpetuities is essentially incomprehensible; B. The statutory language in KRS 381.220 prohibiting suspension of the power of alienation confused both bench and bar; C. The remote possibilities test, in about three-quarters of the cases, deprived beneficiaries of gifts which in fact would have vested in due time.
- We concluded this was unfair and unjustifiable in policyD. The consequences of violating the Rule were harsh and unsettled; E. Confusion surrounds the meaning of vest
- 2. Adoption of the Common Law Rule against Perpetuities; 3. The Wait-and-See Doctrine and Cy Pres; A. The wait-and-see doctrine; B. Reformation by cy pres; 4. Illustrations of How KRS 381.216 Applies; 5. Drafting to Avoid Perpetuities Problems; 5. ABOLITION OF POSSIBILITIES OF REVERTER AND TERMINATION OF RIGHTS OF ENTRY; 1. The Purpose of the Statute.
- 2. Good Riddance: The Determinable Fee and Possibility of Reverter Abolishe
- d3. Termination of Rights of Entry after Thirty Years;
- 4. Termination and Preservation of Possibilities of Reverter and Rights of Entry Created prior to July 1, 1960;
- 5. Exceptions to the Thirty-Year Termination Rule;
- 6. THE RULE AGAINST DIRECT RESTRAINTS ON ALIENATION;
- 1. The Rule against Restraints Distinguished from the Rule against Perpetuities and the Rule against Suspension of the Power of Alienation;
- 2. Restraints on Legal Life Estates and Remainders.
Few rules of law can so quickly strike terror into the hearts of lawyers as the Rule against Perpetuities. This rule, two centuries in development, is designed to prevent tying up property for too long a time. It can be stated in one sentence, but the great nineteenth-century master of the Rule, John Chipman Gray, required more than 400 scrupulously detailed pages to explain it. For deceptive subtleties and unexpected traps it has no equal. This book views the Rule in the microcosm of Kentucky cases. It shows that perpetuities law in action differs from perpetuities law in the books. It is more chaotic than any writer has ever suggested. While the words of doctrine remain the same, the meaning shifts from case to case. Seemingly the law is working slowly and tortuously to a new and sounder policy base. The book also is designed to provide the practicing lawyer with a simplified statement of the Rule and comprehensive analysis of Kentucky cases. Lastly, the book deals with an analysis of reform, particularly the 1960 Kentucky legislature reform act, based upon a draft by the author.
(source: Nielsen Book Data)
