Desantis vs Disney
March 29, 2023 4:10 PM   Subscribe

So I read an article that stated Disney made a contract blocking takeover by the Florida government. The article states: That declaration is valid until “21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, king of England,” according to the document. Why? Is it a joke? Is there some legal reason?
posted by Literaryhero to Law & Government (14 answers total) 3 users marked this as a favorite
 
Best answer: It's the Rule Against Perpetuities - a real property contract can only be valid for a life in being +21 years. This tweet explains it further.
posted by mcgsa at 4:24 PM on March 29, 2023 [5 favorites]


Best answer: I suspect this is to avoid the Rule against perpetuities. Basically for the contract to be enforceable you can't say, "you can NEVER EVER EVER do X," you have to specify an end point.
posted by mskyle at 4:24 PM on March 29, 2023


Best answer: Wikipedia explains it.
posted by Xalf at 4:25 PM on March 29, 2023 [1 favorite]


Best answer: Section 7.1 of the agreement explains that a period is specified in case a court finds that the rule of perpetuities renders the deed covenants created by the agreement invalid because they are specified as being perpetual.

Typically covenants are perpetual, but I can see why Disney's lawyers would want some extra assurance given the way the state has been acting of late.
posted by wierdo at 4:26 PM on March 29, 2023 [1 favorite]


Response by poster: Huh, interesting. Thanks for all the quick and helpful replies. :)
posted by Literaryhero at 4:40 PM on March 29, 2023 [1 favorite]


I am finally happy I had to learn the rule against perpetuities in law school because this fills me with delight.
posted by notjustthefish at 4:50 PM on March 29, 2023 [8 favorites]


Guard the Dauphin!
posted by amtho at 6:56 PM on March 29, 2023 [4 favorites]


Also notable: "In May 2022, Florida amended its statutory rule against perpetuities period, the maximum permitted duration of a Florida trust, from 360 to 1,000 years. Under the new law, an interest in any trust created on or after July 1, 2022 must vest within 1,000 years of that interest's creation"
posted by Garm at 11:35 PM on March 29, 2023


As someone who edited estates law books for decades, I am so thrilled about this. The fact that they picked King Charles III as the life in being is hilarious.
posted by ceejaytee at 9:52 AM on March 30, 2023


Apparently this specific approach is called a royal lives clause.
posted by trig at 11:34 AM on March 30, 2023


The fact that they picked King Charles III as the life in being is hilarious.

They didn't choose Charles as the life in being. They chose William, Harry, George, Charlotte, Louis, Archie, and Lillibet. Whichever dies last.

Good choices IMO because both Elizabeth and Phillip were quite long-lived as was the Queen Mother, I believe. Obvioslybtheyre not the only ancestors, but still, smart thinking.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 6:33 PM on March 30, 2023


They chose William, Harry, George, Charlotte, Louis, Archie, and Lillibet.

And all of their children/grandchildren/great-grands, etc, no? They're basically saying "21 years after the last Windsor." I think the last time a monarch died without legitimate descendants was William IV, back in 1837. His illegitimate-but-still-recognized descendants (the FitzClarences) are still around.
posted by basalganglia at 3:50 PM on April 2, 2023


I'm not a lawyer, but my reading of 21 years after the death of "a life in being" is that the "in being" part means you can only base it on people already born.

Actually this makes me curious does a life in being have to be human? Could I go to a national park and pick out a hundred year old giant redwood and pick that?
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 4:14 PM on April 2, 2023


Bit too easy for anyone against the contract to go at it with a saw...
posted by trig at 5:53 PM on April 2, 2023


« Older Teach me how to nap   |   Wanted: Creative solution for late letters, never... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.