- Rule in Shelley's Case
- "When the ancestor, by any gift or conveyance, taketh an estate of freehold, and in the same gift or conveyance an estate is limited, either mediately or immediately, to his heirs in fee or in tail, 'the heirs' are words of limitation of the estate, and not words of purchase." 1 Co.Rep. 93b (1581).This rule has also been expressed as follows: "Where a person takes an estate of freehold, legally, or equitably, under a deed, will, or other writing, and in the same instrument there is a limitation by way of remainder, either with or without the interposition of another estate, of any interest of the same legal or equitable quality to his heirs, or heirs of his body, as a class of persons to take in succession from generation to generation, the limitation to the heirs entitles the ancestor to the whole estate." In re Thome's Estate, 344 Pa. 503, 25 A.2d 811, 819.Intimately connected with the quantity of estate which a tenant may hold in realty is the antique feudal doctrine generally known as the "Rule in Shelley's Case," which is reported by Lord Coke in 1 Coke, 936 (23 Eliz. in C.B.). This rule was not first laid down or established in that case, but was then simply admitted in argument as a well-founded and settled rule of law, and has always since been quoted as the "Rule in Shelley's Case." The rule was adopted as a part of the common law of this country, though it has long since been abolished by most states
Black's law dictionary. HENRY CAMPBELL BLACK, M. A.. 1990.