Legal Opinion

Trear v. Chamberlain

Court of Appeals of Kansas

Decided January 13, 2017No. 115819PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hill, J.:

The public policy in Kansas commands that land must not be tied up forever by ancient covenants. This policy is expressed in the common-law rule against perpetuities which nullifies any contractual provision that tries to control land forever. Aware of this, and wanting to avoid the harsh result of contract nullification, modern courts frequently interpret contracts to create personal interests in real estate that are unique to the contracting party. Such interests cannot be passed on to all future generations and, thus, cannot violate the rule against perpetuities. We interpret the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Gore v. BerenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1994
  2. Anderson v. Armour & CompanySupreme Court of Kansas · 1970
  3. Barnhart v. McKinneySupreme Court of Kansas · 1984
  4. Martin v. NaikSupreme Court of Kansas · 2013
  5. Singer Company v. Makad, Inc.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1973

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Trear v. ChamberlainSupreme Court of Kansas · 2018
  2. Trear v. ChamberlainSupreme Court of Kansas · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API