Also known as: worthier title doctrine · doctrine of worthier title · worthier title · worthier title rule
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A common-law doctrine under which an inter vivos conveyance purporting to create a remainder in the grantor's heirs instead left a reversion in the grantor. The rule operated both as a mandatory rule of law and later as a presumption of intent favoring title by descent. Modern authorities abolish the doctrine in both forms so that language describing beneficiaries as the transferor's heirs or next of kin creates a remainder in those persons rather than a reversion in the transferor.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Willow West placed her farm in an irrevocable trust granting life estates to her two sons with the remainder to her next of kin. Years later one son sought to sell his life interest to a neighbor. Because the governing statute abolishes the doctrine of worthier title, the remainder interest passed directly to the class of next of kin rather than reverting to Willow's estate, allowing the life estate to remain fully alienable.
Wilma Wright conveyed land to a trustee reserving a life estate for herself and directing the remainder to her heirs at law. After her death a dispute arose over whether the remainder had vested in those heirs or remained in her estate. The court treated the limitation as creating a valid remainder in the heirs rather than a reversion in Wilma because the doctrine of worthier title no longer supplies a presumption that the grantor intended to retain the future interest.
No. Under the Uniform Probate Code and the Restatement Third of Property the doctrine of worthier title is 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 therefore creates a remainder in those persons rather than a reversion in the transferor.
Supporting sources
The abolition removes both the mandatory rule and the presumption of intent. A court may consider extrinsic evidence of actual intent only if the governing instrument itself supplies an express reservation or condition. Bare use of heir language no longer triggers any inference favoring a reversion.
Supporting sources
Because no reversion arises by operation of the abolished doctrine, the life estate conveys marketable title free of any implied claim by the transferor's estate. Lenders and purchasers may rely on the plain terms of the instrument without concern that the future interest will return to the transferor.
Supporting sources
The testamentary branch of the doctrine was never recognized in American law and remains rejected. A devise to the testator's heirs creates a valid remainder in those heirs rather than a nullity that would cause the property to pass by intestacy.
Supporting sources