Story Case

Mr. Silas Duncan died, leaving a will in which there was the provision that "the farm in Michigan, my son John is to own until he dies, and after that I want my youngest nephew Frank to have it in fee." John Duncan was not very friendly with Frank, the nephew, and was inclined to take every advantage of him. He read the will, and insisted that the words "my son John is to own" meant that he was entire owner, and that the words that followed would not be given effect at law. Frank, the nephew, was not satisfied that this was the law, but insisted that his uncle meant to give him, Frank, the complete ownership after John was dead. When John was about to sell the farm, he took the matter to court, contending that John could not give a complete title. Can John sell this land?

Ruling Court Case. Dunning Vs. Stout, Volume 72 Indiana Reports, Page 343

Daniel Stout, owner of a piece of land, conveyed it to a certain party, who conveyed it to Dunning and others. In the conveyance by Daniel Stout, there appeared this sentence: "A condition in the foregoing conveyance is that the said James B. Stout is to have the privilege of a support off of the said land during his lifetime, without encumbrance." This was a bill for partition of the land filed by Dunning and others interested.

In defense to this bill, Stout contended that he had a life estate in this land, and that there could be no partition during his life.

Mr. Justice Worden said: "James B. Stout, then, was to have the privilege of a support off the land, and this privilege was not to be encumbered or impeded. He could not have his support off the land without the use and occupation of it. The right to such support from land involves the use and occupation, as, without the use and occupation, he could not derive his support from it. And it seems to us that a life estate was as effectually conveyed to him as if the deed had provided that he should have the use and occupation, on the rents and profits, of the land for life." The court decided that James B. Stout had a life estate and refused to grant the request for partition.

Ruling Law. Story Case Answer

It has been pointed out, heretofore, that a fee estate is the complete ownership of realty. From this complete ownership, the fee estate, may be carved a lesser estate, called the life estate. A life estate is an interest of a person in some land for the life of himself or the life of another. If we assume that "A" has a life estate in Blackacre and assigns it to "B," in the latter case "B" now has an interest in the property for the life of "A," whereas before the assignment, "A" had a life estate for the term of his own life. A life estate is terminated when the person dies, upon whose life the continuance of the life estate depends. It likewise terminates if it merges with a greater estate in the same person. During his life, the life tenant, so-called, has the right to make reasonable use of the property. But any excessive use of the property is considered waste, for which he might be held liable by the remainderman.

There are a number of life estates which arise by operation of law. Thus, when a man marries a woman who owns land, under the Common Law, he immediately becomes possessed of a life estate in this property during her life. If a child is born to them, he becomes entitled to a life interest for his own life in this property. So, a wife, upon the death of her husband becomes entitled to a life estate in one-third of all his real estate. This is called her dower.

In the Story Case, the uncle did not couch his wishes in the terms of a lawyer, yet it is clear that he intended to give his son only a life estate, and the remainder to his nephew. In construing a will, the courts will always try to carry out the testator's intentions, and the above construction is a reasonable one to place upon the words used by Silas Duncan.