Albro v. Allen
Michigan Supreme Court
454 N.W.2d 85 (1990)
On October 14, 1977, property was conveyed to Carol Allen (defendant) and Helen Albro (plaintiff) as “joint tenants with full rights of survivorship.” On April 23, 1987, Allen agreed to sell her interest in the property to Steven Kinzer (defendant). On May 12, 1987, Albro brought suit seeking injunction against the sale. The trial court granted summary judgment for Albro and permanently enjoined Allen from selling or conveying her interest in the property. The Court of Appeals found that Albro and Allen held “a joint life estate followed by a contingent remainder in fee to the survivor.” Accordingly, the Court of Appeals held that Allen could not alienate her interest in the life estate because it would convert the joint life estate into a tenancy in common and thereby deprive Albro of her right of survivorship.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Boyle, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 168,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.