What is LawBrain?
It's a living legal community making laws accessible and interactive. Click Here to get Started »

Baker v. Weedon

From lawbrain.com

Revision as of 20:02, 25 February 2011 by FindLaw AHK (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Baker v. Weedon, 262 So. 2d 641 (Miss. 1972), is a property law case that examines factors under which a life tenant may sell property in which remaindermen hold a future interest.

  • This LawBrain entry is about a case that is commonly studied in law school. You can find, contribute to, and create other common 1L, 2L, and 3L cases in the Law School Cases category. And you can use the Opinon tab above to discuss hypos. For more information on editing, visit the LawBrain edit help page.


Summary of Case Facts

Weedon, a widow, was granted a life estate for the farm on which she resides by her late husband. Her late husband’s grandchildren from another marriage hold the remainder. Weedon, older in age and in need of money, desires to sell the farm. She asserts that due to the construction of a highway through the middle of the farm it is unsuitable for agriculture and more valuable as development property due to growth in the immediate area. She argues that to allow the property to sit idle and unproductive amounts to waste. The remaindermen (Baker) holding the future interest do not wish to sell the property now, as they believe it will increase in value even more over time.


Should the desires of those holding a future interest in a life estate come into consideration when determining whether the sale of land by a life tenant is proper?

Holding and Law

Yes. The court opined that, “…deterioration and waste of the property is not the exclusive and ultimate test to be used in determining whether a sale of land affected by future interest is proper, but also that consideration should be given to the question of whether a sale is necessary for the best interest of all the parties, that is, the life tenant and the contingent remaindermen.”

Related Cases and Resources on LawBrain


FindLaw AHK, FindLaw John