Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 554 / R.S. of 1846
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 554.13 (2026)

Future estates; classifications, definitions.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Revised Statutes of 1846


R.S. of 1846


554.13 Future estates; classifications, definitions.

Sec. 13.

    Future estates are either vested or contingent:

    They are vested when there is a person in being who would have an immediate right to the possession of the lands, upon the ceasing of the intermediate or precedent estate.

    They are contingent whilst the person to whom, or the event upon which they are limited to take effect remains uncertain.

History: R.S. 1846, Ch. 62 ;-- CL 1857, 2597 ;-- CL 1871, 4080 ;-- How. 5529 ;-- CL 1897, 8795 ;-- CL 1915, 11531 ;-- CL 1929, 12933 ;-- CL 1948, 554.13

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1950–2019 · leading case: Rendle v. Wiemeyer, 131 N.W.2d 45 (Mich. 1964).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rendle v. Wiemeyer, 131 N.W.2d 45 (Mich. 1964). · cites it 6× “) [5] CL 1948, § 554.13 (Stat Ann 1957 Rev § 26.13), purports to distinguish between vested and contingent future estates: "Future estates are either vested or contingent: They are vested when there is a person in being who would have an immediate right to the possession of the…”
Wengel v. Wengel, 714 N.W.2d 371 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “” MCL 554.13. Valid future estates are not void on the basis of the probability or improbability of the contingency.”
Kratze v. Indep. Order of Oddfellows, 475 N.W.2d 405 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “Should any of these eventualities occur, the Grand Lodge assumes possession and ownership of the property of its subordinate lodge and the property is put to other charitable uses. Clearly, the Grand Lodge has no present possessory right or any vested interest in the property…”
In Re Jamieson Est., 132 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 1965). “Costs of this appeal may be taxed in appellants’ favor. • Kavanagh, C.”
Leighton v. Leighton, 159 N.W.2d 750 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968). “CL 1948, § 554.13 [Stat Ann 1957 Eev_§ 26.13]. “The foregoing are findings of fact in this case.”
Marsheri D D Everson v. Delores J Williams (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). “” MCL 554.13. . . . “When a remainder on an estate for life .”
Miller v. Curtiss, 43 N.W.2d 834 (Mich. 1950). “CL 1948, § 554.13 (Stat Ann § 26.13), is as follows: *242 “Future estates are either vested or contingent: “They are vested when there is a person in being who would have an immediate right to the possession of the lands, upon the ceasing of the intermediate or precedent estate.”
West v. McLoughlin, 201 N.W.2d 336 (Mich. Ct. App. 1972). “11; MCLA 554.13; MSA 26.13. MCLA 554.101; MSA 26.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.