FUTURE INTERESTS-COMMON LAW RULE AGAINST PERPETUITIES NOT IN FORCE IN IDAHO-APPLICABILITY OF STATUTE AGAINST SUSPENSION OF POWER OF ALIENATION TO OPTION CONTRACT

Authors

Howard W. Haftel S.Ed., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Seller contracted to give purchaser sixty days notice of his intention to sell certain real property, purchaser to have power, in that event, to buy the property for a stated price within the sixty days. If the purchaser failed to exercise the option, seller was then free to convey the property to anyone. Alleging that seller had conveyed the land to others without notice to him, purchaser sued to have this conveyance set aside and the option specifically enforced. The lower court sustained a general demurrer to the complaint. On appeal, held, reversed. The statutory rule against restraints on alienation has replaced the common law rule against perpetuities in Idaho. The option contract in this case does not violate the statutory rule. Locklear v. Tucker, (Idaho 1949) 203 P. (2d) 380.

Recommended Citation

Howard W. Haftel S.Ed., FUTURE INTERESTS-COMMON LAW RULE AGAINST PERPETUITIES NOT IN FORCE IN IDAHO-APPLICABILITY OF STATUTE AGAINST SUSPENSION OF POWER OF ALIENATION TO OPTION CONTRACT, 47 Mich. L. Rev. 1225 (1949).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol47/iss8/21