Wills, Trusts, and Estates
All the great features you've come to expect in previous editions are here! Along with expertly selected cases, this superb revision delivers comprehensive coverage and a flexible organization with chapters that can be easily rearranged or omitted to fit every instructor's preferences. Written with the lively intelligence that has made this book so popular, "Wills, Trusts, and Estates", Sixth Edition provides exactly what a course in estates and trusts should offer to students: engaging lessons in thinking critically about problems in family wealth transmission.
The Distinctly Different Casebook
-- Clear, concise text -- combined with witty and insightful notes -- make this a casebook that students love to read
-- Cases that hold students' interest, illustrate concepts, and make the material extremely accessible -- evidence of the authors' legendary talent for selecting effective cases
-- Comprehensiveness and flexibility of coverage give you the freedom to choose precisely which material you want to teach -- and in the topic sequence that you prefer
-- Solid, practical models of wills and trusts help students build the competence they will require as practitioners in the estates and trusts field
-- Brilliant problems and questions encourage and guide students in considering and comparing alternative solutions to problems in family wealth transmission
-- An examination of historical roots, where appropriate, gives students a better understanding of some peculiarities of modern law and of the continuing growth of the law
-- An outstanding Teacher's Manual contains answers to all problems and offers additional insights on cases
Results 1-3 of 86
We are required to construe the statute “so as to effectuate the purpose of the law
.” (Select Base Materials v. Board of Equal. (1959) 51 Cal. 2d 640, 645, 335 P.2d
672.) To ascertain that purpose, we may consider its history. At common law a ...
We see no need to ignore the preprinted words when the testator clearly did not,
and the statute does not require us to do so.” The majority opinion cited but did
not discuss, approve, or disapprove In re Estate of Johnson. But cf. In re Estate of
For analyses and assessments of USRAP, see Ira M. Bloom, Perpetuities
Refinement: There Is An Alternative, 62 Wash. L. Rev. 23 (1987); Jesse
Dukeminier, The Uniform Statutory Rule Against Perpetuities: Ninety Years in
Limbo, 34 UCLA L.