Alby v. Banc One Financial
Court of Appeals of Washington
1DissentKurtz, J.
(dissenting) — The rule adopted by the majority is that a reverter clause in a deed does not violate the doctrine of restraint on alienation if the property automatically reverts back to a person or entity that can alienate the property. Additionally, the majority reasons that the clause is not a restraint on alienation because it does not absolutely prohibit transfer. As applied here, the majority’s rule means that the automatic reverter clause in the Alby to Brashler deed is not a restraint on alienation because the property automatically reverts to Susan Alby, who is free to convey the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bellingham First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. GarrisonWashington Supreme Court · 1976
- Miller v. Pacific First FederalWashington Supreme Court · 1976
- Richardson v. DansonWashington Supreme Court · 1954
- Tombari v. Blankenship-Dixon Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1978
- Girard v. MyersCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.