LECTURE LXIII.B.XI.2 OF ESTATES IN REVERSION. 1. What is a reversion ?—353. A reversion is the return of land to the grantor and his heirs, after the grant is over; or, according to the formal definition in the New York Revised Statutes, it is the residue of an estate left in the grantor, or his heirs, or in the heirs of a testator, commencing in possession on the determination of a particular estate granted or devised. 2. What does a reversion necessarily assume ?—353. That the original owner has not parted with his whole estate or interest in the land. 3. From what does Sir William Blackstone say that the doctrines of reversion are derived?—353, 354. From the feudal constitution; but it would have been more correct to have said, that some of the incidents attached to a reversion were of feudal growth, such as fealty, and the varying rule of descent between the cases of a reversion arising out of the original estate, and one limited by the grant of a third per son. 4. Does a reversion arise by operation of law, or by deed or will? -354. By operation of law. And it is a vested interest or estate inasmuch as the person entitled to it has a fixed right of future enjoyment. 5. Is not a reversion an incorporeal hereditament ?—354. It is, and may be conveyed, either in whole or in part, by grant, without livery of seisin. 6. Are reversions expectant on the determination of estates for years, immediate assets in the hands of the heir ?—354. They are. But the reversion expectant on the determina tion of an estate for life, is not immediate assets during the continuance of the life estate, and the creditor takes judgment for assets in futuro. 7. Is the reversioner entitled to his action for an injury done to the inheritance ?-355. He is, because he has a vested interest. 8. What are the usual incidents to the reversion under the En glish law ?-355, 356. Fealty and rent. Fealty, in its feudal sense, does not now exist in this country; but rent is a very important incident, and passes with a grant or assignment of the reversion. It is not inseparable, and may be severed from the reversion, and excepted out of the grant by special words. LECTURE LXIV. B-XII-2. OF A JOINT INTEREST IN ESTATES. 1. In what two ways may a joint interest in land be had?-357. Either in the title or in the possession. 2. What are joint tenants?—357. Joint tenants are persons who own lands by a joint title, created expressly by one and the same deed or will. They hold uniformly by purchase. 3. How are they seised?-359. Joint tenants are said to be seised per my et per tout, and each has the entire possession, as well of every parcel as of the whole. They have each (if there be two of them, for instance) an undivided moiety of the whole. 4. What is the doctrine of survivorship, or jus accrescendi ?—360. It is the distinguishing incident of title by joint tenancy; and, therefore, at common law, the entire tenancy or estate, upon the death of any of the joint tenants, went to the survivors, and so on to the last survivor, who took an estate of inherit ance. 5. Did the common law favor the title by joint tenancy ?-361. It did, by reason of the right of survivorship. 6. When were estates in joint tenancy abolished in New York?— 361. As early as February, 1786, estates in joint tenancy were abolished, except in executors and other trustees, unless the estate was expressly declared, in the deed or will creating it, to pass in joint tenancy. The New York Revised Statutes have reenacted the provision, and with the further declaration that every estate vested in executors and trustees, as such, shall be held in joint tenancy. 7. Can husband and wife take by moieties ?-362. They can not. But they are both seised of the entirety, and the survivor takes the whole; and, during their joint lives, neither of them can alien so as to bind the other. If an estate be conveyed expressly in joint tenancy to a husband and wife, and to a stranger, the latter takes a moiety, and the husband and wife, as one person, the other moiety. 8. How would it be if the husband and wife had been seised of the lands, as joint tenants, before their marriage?-363. They would continue joint tenants afterward, as to that land, and the consequences of joint tenancy, such as severance, partition, and the jus accrescendi, would apply. It is said, however, to be now understood that husband and wife may, by express words, be made tenants in common by a gift to them during coverture. 9. How may joint tenancy be destroyed?-363. It may be destroyed by destroying any of its constituent unities, except that of time. 10. What is the proper conveyance between joint tenants ?—364. A release; and each has the power of alienation over his aliquot share. 11. How may joint tenants sever the tenancy?—364. Either voluntarily by deed, or they may compel a partition by writ of partition, or by bill in equity. It is to be presumed that the English statutes of 31 and 32 Henry VIII. have been generally reenacted or adopted in this country, and, probably, with increased facilities for partition. They were reenacted in New Jersey, in 1797, and in Virginia in their Revised Code, and in New York, 6th of February, 1788 ; and the New York Revised Statutes have made further and more specific and detailed provisions for the partition of lands, held either in joint tenancy, or in common, and they have given equal jurisdiction over the subject to the courts of law and of equity. In Massachusetts and Maine, the writ of partition at common law is not only given, but partition may be effected by petition without writ. 12. When only does a court of equity interfere ?-304, 365. Only when the title is clear, and never where the title is denied, or suspicious, until the party seeking a partition has had an opportunity to try his title at law. The same principle has been acted upon in the courts of equity in this country. 13. What have the New York Revised Statutes prescribed to the courts of law and the Court of Chancery, in respect to partition?— 365. That wherever there shall be a denial of co-tenancy, an issue shall be formed and submitted to a jury to try the fact; and the respective rights of the parties are to be ascertained and settled before partition be made, or a sale directed. 14. Whom does a final judgment or decree, upon partition at law, under the Revised Statutes, bind ?-365, 366. It binds all parties named in the proceedings, and having, at the time, any interest in the premises divided, as owners in fee, or as tenants for years; or as entitled to the reversion, remainder or inheritance, after the termination of any particular estate; or as having a contingent interest therein, or an interest in any undivided share of the premises, as tenants for years, for life, by the curtesy, or in dower. But the judgment does not affect persons having claims as tenants in dower, by the curtesy, or for life, in the whole of the premises subject to the partition. It is likewise provided, in respect to the exercise of equity jurisdiction, in the case of partition, that if it should appear that equal partition can not be made without prejudice to the rights and interests of some of the parties, the court may decree compensation to be made by one party to the other, for equality of partition, according to the equity of the case. This is the rule in equity, independent of any statute provision, when equality of partition can not otherwise be made, 15. From what does an estate in coparcenary always arise?— 366. It always arises from descent. At common law it took place when a man died seised of an estate of inheritance, and left no male issue, but two or more daughters, or other female representatives in a remoter degree. In this case they all inherited equally as co-heirs in the same degree, or in unequal proportions, as co-heirs in different degrees. 16. In what three unities do coparceners resemble joint tenants ?— 366. Unity of title, interest, and possession. 17. But do not coparceners differ from joint tenants in other respects in a most material degree ?-366. They do. They are said to be seised like joint tenants,' per my et per tout, and yet each parcener has a divisible interest; and the doctrine of survivorship does not apply to them. The shares of the partners descend severally to their respective heirs. They may sever their possession, and dissolve the estate in coparcenary, by consent, or by writ of partition at common law. 18. Who are tenants in common ?—367, 368. They are persons who hold by unity of possession; and |