Temple Beth Israel v. Feiss

The majority asks a question that this case does not present and then answers it incorrectly. In the process, it confuses the Oregon law of future interests in a way that, because of the rarity of cases on the subject, may take years to correct. Because I cannot join in creating that confusion, I dissent from the majority’s decision.

In his will, Charles F. Berg gave the Saidee trust1 a contingent remainder in the Forrest trust that was expressly contingent on Forrest dying without surviving issue. Nothing in Charles’ will or in the nature of the remainder suggests that it was also implicitly…