1688 The Duke of Norfolk's Case Rule Against Perpetuities London Rare First Edn

Description: The Duke of Norfolk's Case: or The Doctrine of Perpetuities Fully Set Forth and Explain'd 1688 s.n. [London), 7 7/8 x 12 inches tall hardcover marbled paper-covered boards over cloth spine and tips, gilt lettering to spine, refreshed endpapers, title with engraved publisher's device, [4], 31, [1], 32, [2] pp. Slight soiling, rubbing and edgewear to covers. A former Los Angeles County Law Library copy, with stamps to front and rear boards and blank front and rear endpapers, with a bookplate to the front pastedown and a perforated stamp to the top of the title page. Half inch closed tear and a couple of small holes along the gutter of the title page, which has a bit of soiling. Half-inch edge tears to the fore edge of the last two leaves. Otherwise, apart from some pages with light staining or a couple of instances of period marginalia, a very good copy - clean, bright and unmarked - of this rare and important common law treatise. References: Wing, Early English Books, 1641-1700 (2nd ed., 1994), D2513; English Short Title Catalog No. R17683; OCLC No. 1000691145. The first widely published version of the 1682 legal judgment of the British House of Lords that established the common law rule against perpetuities, a rule which prevents a person from putting qualifications and criteria in a deed or a will that would continue to affect the ownership of property long after he or she has died, a concept often referred to as control by the 'dead hand' or 'mortmain.' Though The Duke of Norfolk's Case (relating to inheritance of the grandchildren of the sixth Duke of Norfolk) was the subject of a brief pamphlet in 1685, this 1688 folio was the first publication naming this the 'rule against perpetuities,' the moniker by which the rule is still known, and includes a preliminary statement, the arguments of counsel, the opinions of the judges and the opinion of the Lord Chancellor, and some interlocutory matter as well as the decretal order of the House of Lords. In the case, the Earl of Arundel tried to create a shifting executory limitation so that some of his property would pass to his eldest son, Thomas (who was mentally deficient), and then to his second son, Henry. Henry would at first receive other property, but that would pass to the fourth son, Charles, if Henry succeeded to Thomas's property. The estate plan also included provisions for shifting the property many generations later if certain conditions should occur. When Henry, by then the 6th Duke of Norfolk, succeeded to Thomas's property, he did not want to pass the other property to Charles. Charles sued to enforce his interest, and the House of Lords held that such a shifting condition could not exist indefinitely. The judges believed that tying up property too long beyond the lives of people living at the time was wrong, although the exact period was not determined until Cadell v. Palmer (1883), 150 years later. As a 20th century American court said, "The rule against perpetuities is an ancient, but still vital, rule of property law intended to enhance marketability of property interests by limiting remoteness of vesting." Cole v. Peters, 3 S.W.3d 846 (Mo. Ct. App. W.D. 1999).

Price: 439.95 USD

Location: Sun City, California

End Time: 2025-01-11T04:15:14.000Z

Shipping Cost: 7.48 USD