Also known as: worthier title · doctrine of worthier title · worthier-title doctrine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A common-law doctrine under which an inter vivos conveyance that purports to create a future interest in the grantor's heirs or next of kin instead retains a reversionary interest in the grantor. Modern authority abolishes the doctrine both as a rule of law and as a rule of construction so that such language creates a remainder in the described class.
Winston Ward placed his farm in an irrevocable trust granting life estates to his two sons followed by a remainder to his next of kin. After the sons' deaths the court determined that the remainder vested in the class of next of kin rather than reverting to Winston's estate. Winston's neighbor who purchased one son's life interest therefore received a marketable life estate free of any claimed reversion.
Walter Washington conveyed an apartment building to his children for their lives with remainder to his heirs at law. After Walter's death his surviving spouse asserted an interest as an heir at law. The court held that the remainder interest passed directly to the heirs at law including the spouse rather than reverting to Walter's estate.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
No. Under modern law the worthier title doctrine has been abolished both as a rule of law and as a rule of construction. Language describing beneficiaries as the transferor's heirs, next of kin, or similar terms creates a remainder in that class rather than a reversion in the transferor.
Supporting sources
The doctrine originated in feudal law to preserve the overlord's incidents of relief, wardship, and marriage by ensuring that heirs acquired land by descent rather than by purchase. Those feudal rationales no longer exist.
Supporting sources
Yes. A grantor who wishes to retain a reversion must use explicit language reserving the interest. The abolition of the doctrine simply removes any presumption that heir language automatically creates a reversion.
Supporting sources
The abolition applies to inter vivos transfers. The testamentary branch of the doctrine, under which a devise to the testator's heirs was sometimes treated as a nullity, was never recognized in American law.
Supporting sources
…estate is limited to heirs of the grantor arises because of the existence in our modern jurisprudence of remnants of the ancient doctrine of worthier title (46 Harv. L. Rev. 993). Prior to our decision in Doctor v. Hughes (225 N. Y. 305, supra ), a conveyance by a grantor with a limitation over to his heirs was said to be governed by that…