Citations (1)



Perpetuities Refinement: There is an Alternative

Ira Mark Bloom

Albany Law School


Washington Law Review, Vol. 62, No. 1, p. 23, 1987

This Purpose of this Article is to provide reasons why the Uniform Statutory Rule Against Perpetuities (USRAP) “wait-and-see” approach should not be used and to offer constructive alternatives to the USRAP. This Article first identifies those areas of agreement between wait-and-see advocates and opponents, including the acknowledged desirability for some rule against perpetuities. The case for wait-and-see is then summarized and the three major wait-and-see methods are described. The Article presents the case against the wait-and-see approach by addressing several underlying, but unfounded, assumptions. The author then makes a case for refining the common law Rule, based in part on a critique of an erroneous decision by the Indiana Supreme Court in 1985. The Article concludes by urging the general rejection of wait-and-see legislation and the specific rejection of the USRAP, asserting that adopting the wait-and-see approach to the common law Rule Against Perpetuities would be tantamount to buying and using “an atomic cannon to kill a gnat.”

Number of Pages in PDF File: 57

Keywords: wait-and-see, uniform statutory rule against perpetuities, USRAP, rule against perpetuities

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: December 7, 2009  

Suggested Citation

Bloom, Ira Mark, Perpetuities Refinement: There is an Alternative (1987). Washington Law Review, Vol. 62, No. 1, p. 23, 1987. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1517206

Contact Information

Ira Mark Bloom (Contact Author)
Albany Law School ( email )
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208
United States

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 256
Downloads: 8
Citations:  1

© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.406 seconds