Doctrine of Worthier Title
What is the Doctrine of Worthier Title?
When a grantor creates a future interest in the grantor's own heirs, the doctrine converts that interest into a reversion in the grantor, preventing the heirs from taking as purchasers.
Definition
The Doctrine of Worthier Title provides that when a grantor makes an inter vivos conveyance creating a remainder or executory interest in the grantor's own heirs, the future interest is treated as a reversion in the grantor rather than a remainder in the heirs. The doctrine's name reflects its feudal origin: it was considered 'worthier' to take by descent (as an heir) than by purchase (as a grantee), primarily because taking by descent generated feudal incidents (such as relief payments) that taking by purchase did not.
In modern American law, the inter vivos branch of the doctrine survives in some jurisdictions as a rule of construction (a rebuttable presumption of grantor intent) rather than a rule of law (an inflexible mandate). Under this approach, a conveyance 'to A for life, remainder to grantor's heirs' raises a presumption that the grantor intended to retain a reversion, but this presumption can be overcome by evidence that the grantor actually intended to create a remainder in the heirs. The testamentary branch (where the doctrine applied to devises to the testator's heirs) has been largely abolished.
The doctrine has significant practical consequences. If the future interest is a reversion in the grantor rather than a remainder in the heirs, the grantor can transfer, release, or otherwise deal with the interest. The heirs, having no present interest, cannot object to a sale or settlement. Several states have abolished the doctrine entirely by statute, finding it an anachronistic relic of feudalism.
Key Elements
- 1Grantor makes an inter vivos conveyance (not a will)
- 2The conveyance creates a future interest in the grantor's own heirs
- 3Under the doctrine, the future interest is treated as a reversion in the grantor
- 4In most modern jurisdictions, applied as a rule of construction (rebuttable) rather than a rule of law
- 5The heirs take nothing as purchasers; they may inherit only through the grantor
Landmark Cases
Doctor v. Hughes
225 N.Y. 305 (1919)
Judge Cardozo's opinion established the modern American approach, treating the Doctrine of Worthier Title as a rule of construction (rebuttable presumption) rather than an absolute rule of law.
Hatch v. Riggs National Bank
361 F.2d 559 (D.C. Cir. 1966)
Applied the doctrine as a rule of construction to determine the grantor's actual intent and allowed the presumption of a reversion to be rebutted.
Braswell v. Braswell
195 Va. 971 (1954)
Applied the doctrine to an inter vivos trust, converting a remainder designated for the settlor's heirs into a reversion in the settlor.
Exam Tips
- This doctrine only applies to inter vivos conveyances -- not wills. If the grant is testamentary, the doctrine does not apply.
- Look for the phrase 'to grantor's heirs' or 'to the heirs of the grantor' after a preceding estate. That is the trigger.
- Determine whether the jurisdiction treats the doctrine as a rule of law or a rule of construction, as this affects whether it can be rebutted.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Applying the doctrine to testamentary transfers -- the testamentary branch has been abolished in virtually all jurisdictions.
- Confusing the Doctrine of Worthier Title (future interest in grantor's heirs) with the Rule in Shelley's Case (future interest in grantee's heirs).
Memory Aid
Worthier Title = grantor's heirs get nothing directly. 'GRANTOR's heirs = GRANTOR's reversion.' Compare with Shelley's Case, which involves the GRANTEE's heirs.