Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Perpetuities Refinement: There is an Alternative

57 Pages Posted: 7 Dec 2009  

Ira Mark Bloom

Albany Law School

Date Written: 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.”

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

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:

Ira Mark Bloom (Contact Author)

Albany Law School ( email )

80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208
United States

Paper statistics

Abstract Views