Since the patience of the reader and the space in this issue of the Law Review are nearing their limits, I wish to publish only two points in response to what Professor Dukeminier has written.. These points further support my position that Dukeminier's proposed statute would lead almost anyone to conclude that A, not X, is the causal relationship measuring life in Example 1 of my article.1 By implication, these points, along with the others made in my article, corroborate my overall thesis: Professor Dukeminier's proposed one-sentence statute2 cannot be counted a responsible way of identifying the measuring lives for waitand- see, if indeed measuring lives are to be used at all;3 the exact meaning of persons "who can affect the vesting of the interest" is disputable and the various subsidiary rules Dukeminier announces need rethinking, clarifying, and codifying.
Waggoner, Lawrence W. "A Rejoinder by Professor Waggoner." Colum. L. Rev. 85 (1985): 1739-41.