Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 500.16 (2026)

Expectant Estates: Descendible, Devisable, Alienable

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Expectant estates are descendible, devisable, and alienable in the same manner as estates in possession; and hereafter contingent rights of reentry for breach of conditions subsequent, and rights to possession for breach of conditions subsequent after breach but before entry made, and possibilities of reverter, shall be descendible, devisable, and alienable in the same manner as estate in possession.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1954–1989 · leading case: Harbal v. Fed. Land Bank of St. Paul, 449 N.W.2d 442 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989).
Harbal v. Fed. Land Bank of St. Paul, 449 N.W.2d 442 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 500.16 (1986), the interest in a sheriff’s certificate is freely alienable.”
Mareck v. Hoffman, 100 N.W.2d 758 (Minn. 1960). · cites it 3× “We have heretofore held that prior to the 1937 amendment of § 500.16 possibilities of reverter were inalienable under the laws of this state.”
Consol. Sch. Dist. No. 102 v. Walter, 66 N.W.2d 881 (Minn. 1954). · cites it 2× “27 Defendants contend that, because the rule against alienability is a bad one, we should not now adopt it, particularly in view of the provisions of § 500.16 to the contrary. Our function is to ascertain and apply the law as it exists, however undesirable it may sometimes…”
In Re Application of Mareck to Register Title, 257 Minn. 222 (Minn. 1960). · cites it 3× “We have heretofore held that prior to the 1937 amendment of § 500.16 possibilities of reverter were inalienable under the laws of this state.”
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.