Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 500.11 (2026)

Future Estates; Inclusiveness

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Common law remainders.

When a future estate is dependent upon a precedent estate, it may be termed a remainder, and may be created and transferred by that name.

When a remainder on an estate for life or for years is not limited on a contingency defeating or avoiding such precedent estate, it shall be construed as intended to take effect only on the death of the first taker, or at the expiration, by lapse of time, of such term of years.

Subd. 2.Conditional limitations; shifting interests.

A remainder may be limited on a contingency which, in case it should happen, will operate to abridge or determine the precedent estate; and every such remainder shall be construed a conditional limitation, and have the same effect as such limitation would have by law.

Subd. 3.Springing interests.

Subject to the rules established in this chapter, a freehold estate, as well as a chattel real, may be created to commence at a future day; an estate for life may be created in a term of years, and a remainder limited thereon.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1999–2014 · leading case: In Re the Est. of Van Den Boom, 590 N.W.2d 350 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In Re the Est. of Van Den Boom, 590 N.W.2d 350 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “; Minn.Stat. § 500.11, subd. 1 (1998). Van Den Boom and his siblings have a vested remainder in the homestead because decedent’s widow has only a life estate.”

Marian v. Swanson v. Terrence K. Swanson (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “Minn. Stat. § 500.11 (2012). Because respondent has a present possessory interest and appellant has a future interest, they do not share the same right to possession and are not tenants in common under the plain meaning of section 558.”

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.