Passing the Joint Tenancy

Transcript

This transcript was generated automatically and may contain errors — the audio is the record.

0:00:00 Clip: You must never, ever give up or give in. You must keep the faith and keep your eyes on the prize. That is your calling. That is you mission. That is moral obligation. That is mandate. Get out there and do it. Get in the way. Change happens because people care. The people have the power to make this life free and beautiful. To make this live a wonderful adventure.

0:00:38 Clip: I still believe with all my heart, America can be a place where no child is left hungry, no community is left behind, and no one gets told they don't belong. Country is always worth it.

0:00:57 Thomas: Hello and welcome to Opening Arguments. This is Bar Exam with Thursday.

0:01:05 Thomas: T3B Thursday, maybe. I don't know. Thomas. That over there is Lydia. How you doing?

0:01:09 Lydia: Hi. I'm doing well, laughing at you trying to figure out what to call this. I think every week is going to be something different.

0:01:17 Thomas: The important part is it's the Bar Exam. It's practice bar questions. It's so much fun. It's Heather Varanini. And then, of course, it's patron shout outs with Lydia. Much fun! On

0:01:27 Lydia: What else could you want?

0:01:28 Thomas: Uh, I could want to get a bar question right for once that's Something I'm hoping maybe today will be my lucky day Um, got to find out first about that larceny burglary thing find out what's going on there and then we got a fun new question um before we get to that we have a big chunk of gavel gavel coming within hours just very soon almost done big chunk talking massive chunk the biggest you'll ever see so that's a lot of fun we got some really cool Where There's Woke out and, uh, couple really fun, like classic serious inquiries only

0:01:35 Lydia: Believe in you. Yep. One of the biggest. Yeah.

0:02:10 Thomas: Good science stuff, uh. Study on love languages. Are those real? Are those anything? And also a really cool, actually, I really want to make sure to plug this, a great episode inspired by opening arguments. Uh, listeners who studied abortion legislation, uh this country and tried to take a look at systematically like how accurate the medical language is in it. And it probably won't shock you to hear the results of that. Those folks trying to ban abortion. And when I say trying, those abortion don't really know what the F they're doing. Who would have thought? Lots of good pod in your usual end of month chunk.

0:02:52 Thomas: Hope you check some of that out. Or all of it, right? Well, we've got bar examining to get to and shout outs after that. Yeah, it's true. She's in the void right now. She is waiting. Fortunately, time has no meaning there, so she'll be fine. Lydia, we'll see you for the shout outs at the end of the show.

0:02:59 Lydia: Keep Heather waiting. You sure will.

0:03:12 Thomas: Right. Until then. Want to support the show, go to patreon.com/law and skip the ads and get the goodies. After this break, we'll get to the answer to question 67 with none other than bar prep experts, Heather Varanini. Show is brought to you by 1 -800 -Flowers. You know it's coming up. You know what I'm going to say. Mother's Day is coming up, and moms deserve something nice. When it comes to flowers, there's only one place I would go to get it right every time. 1 -800 -Flowers .com. I have to tell you something great about 1 - 800 -FlowERS .com true story. Ordered some flowers for Lydia and I messed up and they came while we were gone. What I'm telling you this. Flowers from 1 -800 -Flowers .com sat in their packaging. I want To make clear, this is entirely me, my fault. This is not, this is not on them. They when I opened them, they looked amazing. They still looked so good. And that really is just a sign of the quality care and good packaging they use. Could not even believe this. Seriously. In way I was more excited even though I did mess up the gift to Lydia, but it was like, hey, it also came with a good story. Would not have even been able to tell, actually, if I had not wanted to tell this very funny story about it. Have a great deal going on. Right now, when you order one dozen roses, they'll double it to two dozen for free. Don't wait. Show mom or, you know, whomever just how much they mean to you with a gift that says it all. Go to claim your double your roses offer, go to 1 -800 -Flowers .com slash opening. That's 1 - 800 -FlowERS dot com slash opening.

0:04:52 Thomas: Heather, how you doing today?

0:04:54 Heather: Pretty well. I, you know, I'm going to be honest. I haven't been on any hot red motorcycles in the last week, but here we are. What about you?

0:05:02 Thomas: I don't see a lot of red motorcycles. I feel like that was combining two things. I think it was like fast red car slash motorcycle, which is already, you don't need, it's gilding the lily. And so they say, they say hat on hat, you know, a hat on a hat. Like you don't need, the motorcycle is already this fast motorcycle. I think that's what was going on there. And if you don't remember what I'm talking about, everyone, it's last week's question, number 67, which we're going to find out the answer to today. But to answer your question, I'm doing great. I'm so glad to have you here. That's why I'm happy.

0:05:12 Heather: That's fair. Yeah I'm thinking.

0:05:31 Thomas: Hope you're doing well.

0:05:32 Heather: Oh I am and I'm so

0:05:36 Thomas: Right. Now, having said that, let's find out if I'm going to remain happy. All Right. Remind us, what was question 67?

0:05:43 Heather: Friend Marsha decided that her life needed a little sprucing and so she bought herself a motorcycle and then she kept it in her garage but her neighbor Dylan was really jealous. Loves motorcycles but he did not have the funds to purchase one so he decided he was going to make an automatic garage door opener and one night he was

0:05:59 Thomas: And one time a girl named Marsha was mean to him before. So, you know, it is like practically, can you blame this guy? On, geez.

0:06:10 Heather: So one night, downtrodden Dylan decided that he was going to use his device to open Marsh's garage door, hotwire the motorcycle, and then take it for a joyride. And then he did. But when he was out, he was having such a great time. He just thought he would stop by a party. And in the middle, he got a little angry. And he decided, no, I can't.

0:06:26 Thomas: Can you blame them? I mean, men never get a chance in this world. By the way, we should mention, Heather found a new source. It's called Incel Bar Exam Questions. It is a great source for bar exam questions. It's what we're using from here on out. So if you notice a theme.

0:06:40 Heather: It's on the dark web. It is a rabbit hole.

0:06:44 Thomas: Now that 4chan's been hacked, that's out. This is what they did over there, I guess, is answer these part questions.

0:06:53 Heather: Yeah, an angry Dylan. He pushed off the motorcycle, and he just, like, watched the world burn, right? And we're trying to figure out now what crime or crimes Dylan was guilty of. Is it A, no crime, B, burglary, C, larceny, or D, both burglery and larcenY? You can identify this as a criminal law question. Rightfully so, right, where a call of our question asked what crime, or crimes, was Dylan guilty of? So...

0:07:16 Thomas: Glad I got that.

0:07:18 Heather: Yeah. So a lot of times you can narrow down. I love questions like this because it automatically tells you the subtopic. We're kind of down to two, really. More or less, we have to choose from, which is burglary or larceny. And so we've got to kind of recall those rules if we have them and then go from there. Or it just might be no crime, right? But you eliminated no crime.

0:07:35 Thomas: It might be no crime,

0:07:36 Heather: Tell me why you thought it was not no crime?

0:07:41 Thomas: Because of the crimes, mostly. Of the several, it several crimes. I mean, I guess we're talking about one crime, but like, I feel like the opening the garage and all that. I don't know what crime is.

0:07:54 Heather: Yeah, and usually speaking, you can't just take something that isn't yours and get away with it. He did a bad, and then now we're trying to figure out about which bad thing he did. You know what I mean? That's where we're at. So you're right. So A, off the table immediately. And I liked, too, how you worked through D, kind kind of working through the question and also going, well, if I'm picking B or C, then it can't be both. Of those things, because you kind of picked up right away that the question was testing one of those and not both of those. It was testing both, but it wanted you to pick one, I should clarify.

0:08:23 Thomas: Yeah. Well, sometimes and look, sometimes if you if you attack someone on the street, I think you can be guilty of assault and battery because it's technically two different things. But when it comes to stealing something, me if I'm wrong. I think it pretty much can only be either or with burglary or larceny. I don't really think it can be both. Can it or do I have that wrong?

0:08:32 Heather: Well, let's talk little bit about burglary and let's about larceny. So, burglary is the breaking and entering of the dwelling of another at nighttime with the intent to commit a felony therein. Let's take a peek at this. So our friend Dylan, he definitely, yes, yeah.

0:08:56 Thomas: With the intent to commit a felony. What? So burglary. Okay. What is the, oh, is, am I thinking of robbery? No. What's the larceny one that we, that distinction?

0:09:05 Heather: By force or fear. Robbery. Exactly.

0:09:08 Thomas: I was thinking of robbery the whole time. Oh, that's bad. Okay, well, we'll see if it still holds up.

0:09:12 Heather: But you make a great point because a lot of times these questions are also testing that because the next thing you ask yourself is, oh no, am I thinking about, because you did exactly what a lot people do, which is, Oh no, my thinking of the wrong thing. Is it the no crime? Is it not listed here? So that's pretty normal. This question is exactly testing that. And you went through the exact thing. So you, when you said, Oh, I think the garage is important. Is that something that matters? And the answer is yes, because it's still a dwelling. And so when he gets into the. We're like, okay, now are we in burglary territory? And it says at night, right? So that satisfies that night requirement. It's of another person, right. It's not him kind of breaking his own stuff. So it's definitely Marsha. So we've got that satisfied, but then we got intent to commit a felony. So under common law felonies, um, they're referred to as the, sorry, give me a minute. It'S the bar, the bar felon is the B A R K. Um, that's a good way to remember them, the burglery, arson, rape, robbery, and kidnapping.

0:10:05 Heather: Look at this and we say, is our friend Dylan trying to commit any of the bark felonies? He's not.

0:10:11 Thomas: So wait, OK, we're talking about so burglary. You have to be intending to do something else. It's not just breaking. I guess they'd be breaking entering or something. You know, you have to do a felony and you're saying the felonies are. Think you said burglars, one of the felony that can't be. Wait, what? What are the felons?

0:10:26 Heather: Yeah, so with that, we're looking at inherently that are inherently dangerous, and that tends to be... same burglary, arson, rape, robbery, kidnapping. We're not really looking at, oh, are we committing a felony as part of the burglary? Like you said, that doesn't really make a lot of sense. So we tend to look at the arson the rape, robbery, or kidnapping because that's where we're at. Is he going to commit one of those while he's there?

0:10:49 Thomas: OK, so it does. So his intent did matter there where it's trying to make me think, well, he's only trying to like, I guess that would be larceny. Then he's he's like burglaring with a with a breaking in with an intent to do larcenY, but then ends up. Doing more. OK, so I see the level of devious crap this is. So, yeah, I guess if you're saying that taking the motorcycle in this way is not robbery, then I guess there's no felony that we can point to. Is that what you're getting at?

0:11:17 Heather: And that's the reason that we take burglery off the table. Because we don't have him with that intent to commit a felony. We don't know what that tells us also is that we have to make sure too, that while that's happening is that he also satisfies the larceny requirement, right? Which also helps us to make the A is also a wrong answer as well, right, like we said, but we'll also double check. I always like to double check, so let's walk through C. Let's walk

0:11:45 Thomas: Going to be an insane loophole if he's not guilty of any crimes. I'm going to go ahead and quit the bar exam if that's what the answer is.

0:11:50 Heather: That would be bad. So larceny is the taking and carrying away of the personal property of another by trespass with the intent to permanently deprive, right? So we definitely have that situation where our friend Dylan, right, he definitely trespasses. He's on the property of Marsha. Definitely he's in a situation where he's taking the motorcycle. But to your point, you said, I think this question is getting me to think about the intent. And this raises a question about whether or not when he went into her garage, did he have that intent the first time when he stepped foot to impermanently deprive Marsha of the motorcycle? That's the question that kind of arises in the middle of the fact pattern. It's part of what makes this so challenging, right?

0:12:35 Thomas: Mean, if you say so, sure. I think in real life, there's no jury in the world that would be like, yeah, he only intended to just show off and bring it back. I don't think that would ever happen. But since it's a bar question, we can go ahead and pretend that's what's really going on.

0:12:49 Heather: Listen, bear with me for a minute. Exactly.

0:12:51 Thomas: Take it as a given that when he broke in, he was intending to just, what, borrow it?

0:12:57 Heather: Right he he was gonna joyride he walked in he was like I'm just gonna joy ride that's what the facts tell us right that's

0:13:01 Thomas: And that's not a crime. You can apparently just do that, everyone. It sounds like it. We'll find out.

0:13:08 Heather: Not what I'm saying we have this issue here then around intent as the rule for larceny kind of lays out, right? Because it requires that he has to go in wanting to permanently deprive her of it, right, rather than just temporarily. So what ends up happening, though, is that, like you said, this can't be right, right. Because we also have these other facts that tell us that eventually he goes to this party and he pushes it off a cliff and then the motorcycle obviously goes in the water and it's gone forever, right part of what makes the question challenging as well, which is that we have this rule called the continuing trespass doctrine. So when a person takes property, but maybe doesn't initially intend to steal it, but decides to keep it while still in possession of the property, or in this particular situation, still has the motorcycle in his property, and he later decides he's now permanently deprive Marsha of her property.

0:14:08 Thomas: So it's like Schrodinger's motorcycle. It's Schrotinger's crime. Because if you just, oh, whoops, I accidentally drove off with your motorcycle because I thought it was mine. Apparently, we'll say that could be like not. Problem. But if you do the same thing, you're like, oh, whoops, it seems I'm on someone else's motorcycle. And then you're, like, well, you know, finders keepers. Then, like that whole, so, like the whole time when the motorcycle is in the box, you don't know whether it's alive or dead. You don't whether it is the crime or not until the thing that happens after. Think that's what you're saying, right?

0:14:24 Heather: The rev of the engine is what really leads us to know what's happening at the end.

0:14:44 Thomas: But you're you're what makes, when you make the choice later, it does reconvert the whole thing, like kind of like applies to the whole situation.

0:14:52 Heather: Yeah, especially because he still has it in his possession.

0:14:55 Thomas: Yeah. No, that's what I mean. So you put if I put a cat in a box, let's say if I. Put a cat. In a box. And. It's either like, I thought it was my cat and I was just putting my cat in the box. But then I found out. That later that it's your cat. And I'm like, yeah, I think I'm just going to keep it though. When that cat is in that box. The whole time. I don't know whether I've committed a crime yet until the future.

0:15:21 Heather: I just started thinking back to the future and I'm sorry my brain just... Yes,

0:15:23 Thomas: I think we can make a Schrodinger example that perfectly makes it Schrodinger's cat. Like the cat, we have to make it be alive or dead. I'm trying to figure out how that works. Don't have to do that. We'll nice to the cat. We will just say, am I abducting a cat or not? And you don't know until later. I am like, ha, I have this cat in my possession. Maybe it was an accident at first, but now I am deciding to steal it.

0:15:44 Heather: Then it converts. Or, listen, I'm going to make it more complicated. Let's say you borrowed my cat. My consent and you intend, right. And you intended to give it back, but let's say something happened to the cat. Let's say I got pushed off a cliff. Okay. Worst case scenario, even then that's not larceny.

0:15:50 Thomas: People do. Because I didn't intend it? Oh, okay. I am like, shoot, I need a cat for the cat contest. And I had a great one. But the only one that'll do is actually Heather's cat because I lost mine. Heather's Cat looks just like it. I'm just going to put it in the cat contests real quick and then return it. And then someone else takes the cat during that because we're not going to do violence to cats. And I didn't even mean to. So I'm not guilty of larceny. I've got to be guilty of something though, right? I mean, like you can't just take people's things, can you?

0:16:02 Heather: Because yes, that's fair. Oh yeah. Right. I could sue you.

0:16:36 Thomas: So it's just not a crime. That was going to be my question is let's imagine a world in which Dylan did all this, created the creepy garage door opener thing to break into people's garages, took the motorcycle, returned it. And then like, you know, someone's ring camera shows it and Marsha's like, what? You saying there's no crime there?

0:16:43 Heather: I probably in the real world the truth is is that there's likely a crime on the books in that jurisdiction in which you can't just like joyride stuff right but this is the bar exam where it's like

0:17:04 Thomas: We're in common law land. Common land.

0:17:06 Heather: Where nuance is lost you

0:17:09 Thomas: There's only, yeah, where there's ONLY common law. We're like, get rid of all this newfangled law. Only common law, you're saying no crime. You would have to go like civil remedies for that? For him borrowing the motorcycle and putting it back? Mean, as long as he tops it up. I assume if you use some of the fuel, then you've stolen the fuel.

0:17:26 Heather: Is expensive. I want that mfr to reimburse me for the expense

0:17:28 Thomas: I'm serious. There's no crime as long as you didn't intend. This is crazy to me. What is happening here?

0:17:35 Heather: Yeah, because one of the critical parts of criminal law the is intent. You have to have the intent at the same time, generally speaking, as you have the act. You

0:17:48 Thomas: Yes, but the problem I'm having is not that. The problem I am having is I thought having a criminal mind is saying I'm going to take something that's not mine. Thought that was the criminal part, but you're like, no, the criminal is like, you know, you have to intend not to give it back. So there's something, you

0:18:04 Heather: That's exactly it. Cause, um, some of the rules that what exactly that intent is might not always just to do crime generally isn't like necessarily will satisfy if that makes sense. Yeah. Which is like kind of wild, right? Just doing crime, like isn't enough to always get you to the place where like, yeah, yeah.

0:18:22 Thomas: I mean, I get the intent rule, but it just I think it's just I thought the crime was like, if I intend to take something that isn't mine, I feel like that's intent enough, regardless of the like, well, but he actually intended later to give it back. It's just weird that we're that lenient with this kind of crime, this stuff, this kind behavior. I don't know.

0:18:41 Heather: No yeah and you know and note too that um some jurisdictions right no matter where you live it might be it might actually be more specific than that right so for the no

0:18:47 Thomas: Hey, don't take crime advice from this podcast.

0:18:50 Heather: No absolutely do not yeah where you might be more broad it'll just depend yeah so I hope that makes you feel better sorry

0:18:57 Thomas: So we've gotten to... So that gets us to where? Where does that get us to?

0:19:02 Heather: That gets us to larceny, because what happened is that although he didn't have the requisite intent at the time that he took the motorcycle, he developed the continuing trespass by the time he pushed it off.

0:19:12 Thomas: It didn't didn't convert it to though he went in, cover of night, into someone's domicile and something at

0:19:19 Heather: He didn' t intend to commit a felony.

0:19:21 Thomas: That time. Okay.

0:19:23 Heather: And listen, if he went in and he was like, I'm going to light this motorcycle on fire, like, and do the arson, different story. Then we're at burglary.

0:19:30 Thomas: Burglery. It's never... Somehow every time there's been one of these, it doesn't end up being burglory. It doesn't happen, I guess. It just never does.

0:19:38 Heather: Do you want me to find you? Listen, I can find you a burgl... Listen.

0:19:40 Thomas: No. I don't want you to. I want to know.

0:19:43 Heather: I'm going to come up with a burglary question for you. I'm gonna slip it in.

0:19:45 Thomas: Now you can now you can't do that for like five years because I'll remember. You know, you've ruined it. There can be no but no burglaries, everyone. Heather ruined burglary for me.

0:19:58 Heather: She ruined a perfectly good burglery. How dare she?

0:20:01 Thomas: Right, everyone, no burglaries. Well, that sucks. But I am happy with myself that, again, a second chance bar exam is does cannot count for anything in the real world. But in Thomas world, I feel good about switching my second chance from D to C on those logical grounds. OK, so another one wrong. I don't love this. I'm dipping below. Let's see. I haven't had a score check in in a minute. Oh, 37 out of 63. I am at 58 .73 percent. So, you know, I'm just dropping, dropping like a. like a motorcycle off a cliff, that of mine. But this was a weird one.

0:20:35 Heather: Into a sea of despair. Sorry, sorry.

0:20:39 Thomas: Yep. I'm despairing. All right. Well, we'll have to see who didn't despair and who figured out this bullshit.

0:20:47 Thomas: Nonsense. Empathy question. Incels. You can't convict him of anything. Should have known. I it's your, you tend to take something. You premeditated, you created a garage door opener. I mean, I guess it's larceny. So I'll give you that. It did end up with the larcenY, but like still anyway. All right. No. Okay. That was fun. I was a real trick question. It. I believe I knew enough to know about the nighttime dwelling thing and still got it wrong because we had the other stuff going on. But, it's the intent to commit a felony. Gosh, I did forget that part. Crazy.

0:20:57 Heather: And in Thomas's, in Thomas jurisdiction, the requisite intent is much easier to meet. It is because you don't think about felonies that often. How Dare you? I'll

0:21:30 Thomas: It's stealing is not a felony, I guess. So going into someone's house and stealing someone, unless it's a kidnapping, I can't steal a person, but you can't light anything on fire and you can, I murder someone, but yeah, that's okay. All right. Fine. Win bar exam. Let's find out who won. As we look to the Internet, I am so pleased with our listeners. You know, they did me a solid this week and nobody got it right. Just about maybe literally nobody. Actually, I don't see. Single winner. Everybody pretty much thinks it's D or they went with my answer, B. don't see any winners. If I'm apologies, if I'm missing anyone now, we, are you recording this a little earlier ahead of when we normally do. So maybe those correct answers will have filtered in after, but I feel like this was just a genuinely tough question, which, Hey, that's fine. I like it. That makes me feel better. Usually when I get it wrong, everyone else gets it right. So why don't you, since we know we don't have a blue sky winner, why don'T we start with Reddit? How are we doing over there?

0:22:57 Heather: We're talking about burglary, because this question did do a lot of misleading down the burglARY rabbit hole. So I think it was easy to kind of go that way. And also, it's tough to kind the continuing trespass doctrine part of this question, which is how you get to see. And that's part of why this was so tough. And, also, I think a lot people noted that crimes, which was part of what made this difficult, between burglARY, robbery, larcenY, yeah.

0:23:21 Thomas: Yes. People did note that I was mistaking robbery for burglary. I didn't think we needed another word. I'll be honest. I think my brain was like, that's enough different words for what's happening. And so I was like I know there's larceny. That's distinct because that's memorable. Larceny, what the hell is that? No one knows until, you know, this show or law school. Then the other one. That was either burglery or robbery.

0:23:48 Heather: It's a good thing to highlight too, because questions like this, they'll test those differences and you'll be like, oh, and often in the test test situation, you'll be like there is that other one. And is it is it this one? And so I think you touched exactly on part of why this was hard. So a lot of people saw that as well. I'll shout out a couple of folks who I saw participating. I thought was great. So please excuse me if If I say your naming correctly, bear with me. I saw El Farmerino. Saw Skeptical Monkey and Hear Vox and Unidwan. Sorry if I got that wrong. And also a shout out to Mikey Malloy, who is going to be graduating from law school in a few short weeks.

0:24:24 Thomas: Ooh, congrats.

0:24:24 Heather: Yeah, so good luck. I know you'll be graduating. So please take time to celebrate. Take a little bit of a break before you sit for the exam or study for the exam and good luck as you do that. So great job. It was great to see all the participation. But again unfortunately um lot of uh wrong answers but that's okay that's how we learn um so thomas you weren't alone

0:24:41 Thomas: That's how I learned to feel better about myself. So I appreciate it. Very nice. So I guess no specific shout out. Other than we're getting a general shout out because no one got it right. Well, I'll do the same thing on Patreon. Then I will shout out. First off, I'm going to shout out word origins dot org because they said I wanted to share this on blue sky, but there's no thread. No threat on this episode to share. So, yeah, you get top points, wordorigins .org, for trying to share on Blue Sky. They said, you know, answer D. Now, I will say I am pretty proud of myself for changing my second chance. I'm very proud of that because I do think a strong logical point I thought of was that they couldn't be both. I was trying to think of how there could be two crimes, but they really couldn't. I only thought like, OK, maybe. Something about like the way he broke into the garage, if that was technically like depending on what burglary was. But I didn't ultimately go for that. And so, you know, that was the difference between getting that second chance and my business my thriving second chance law firm business

0:25:38 Thomas: Still doing well. I will say that was good. So a lot of D answers that weren't right and a lot to be answers that went with me that weren'T right. And I don't man, I don'T know. Yeah, I got I got no correct answers here. Crazy. Shout outs to everyone for being great. Maybe I'll see which one has the most hearts. That is. Clarence Thomas. Why is their name just Clarenced Thomas? Oh, no, this is good. I see. Okay. No, this might be satirical here. Is no deeply rooted historical tradition regulating the theft of motorcycles. Indeed, the founding fathers of this great country made no mention whatsoever in their illustrious constitution of the sick -ass Kawasaki Ninja H2R.

0:25:55 Heather: Look someone's trolling us yeah

0:26:21 Thomas: Nor of its 326 horsepower and top speed of over 200 miles per hour. Therefore, this court must find that no crime has been committed. And the answer is A. Yeah, no, this is the new correct answer, actually. This is, I'm going to go ahead and take off my second chance bar exam because this is actually correct. That's fantastic. I can't, I was like, for a moment, I doubted. I was just Clarence Thomas. Why didn't they do like Clarency? You know, they usually, it's a joke in the name, but no, that's even better. Fantastic. Couldn't be more clear of a winner on that. That is so good.

0:26:54 Thomas: No crime. All right. Well, that was a tough one. Let's see if I can, you know, recover. My score is not doing well. I got to really focus and see if we can get the question right. After this break, we'll have question 68. show was brought to by Soul CBD. Know, I found a bit of a conundrum in my older age, which is that That drinking is, to me, fun and delicious, and yet, the consequences. One, it's so many calories. For three, the idea of ever being hungover or even just feeling, you close to my best in the next morning. That is a little rough these still want an alternative that lets you feel great in the moment and the next morning, you try these out -of -office gummies from Sol. First off, love the name, A+. Out -of office gummies, fantastic. Is a wellness brand that believes feeling good should be fun and easy. Sol specializes in delicious hemp -derived THC and CBD products designed to boost your mood and you unwind. Best -selling out -of -office gummies were designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz, your mood, and enhance creativity and relaxation. And look, if you're a bit of a newbie, kind of like I am, the out -offICE gummies come in four different strengths, so you can find the perfect dose that works for you. Again, I love the names. Sol is Very Good With Language. I love these names. Names. You can choose from a gentle buzz, noticeable high, or a fully lit experience. Is great. And really just a better alternative to drink. It is. You're going to feel way better. On the good vibes and treat yourself to soul today. Now, soul is offering our audience 30 % off your entire order. To getsoul .com and use code opening. That's It's GetSoul, G -E -T -S -O -U -L, GetSOUL .com, promo code opening for 30 % off.

0:26:52 Heather: That was full clearance

0:28:44 Thomas: Okay, Heather, let's see. Here we go. Question 68. right, let'S do it.

0:28:48 Heather: And Hubert bought a beautiful piece of land nestled among the hills with a lovely home situated on it, taking title as joint tenants. Few years later, they married and had a child, Kelly. Several years after that, Wendy and Herbert divorced. And Kelly continued to live on the land after the divorce, although title remained in the names of both Hubert and Wendy. Moved out of state, conveying all his title and interest in the land by deed to to Kelly.

0:29:00 Thomas: Property. Okay. Yeah.

0:29:17 Heather: After, Hubert was killed one evening when a motorcycle fell on him while he was tide pooling by the ocean.

0:29:16 Thomas: Okay That's great.

0:29:26 Heather: Died without a will. Has title to the land? It A, Wendy? Wendy owns one half and Hubert's lawyer owns one half as tenants by the entirety?

0:29:30 Thomas: Motorcycle. So he

0:29:41 Heather: Wendy and Kelly as joint tenants? Or D. Wendy and Kelly as tenants in common.

0:29:45 Thomas: Boy. Okay. Well, right when I'm down, right. When I'm already down, kicking me while I'm done with this real property. Okay, okay. Fine. All right, fine. We're going to play that way. All tenants. Okay. Joint tenants, joint tenants now what's the one. Okay, I'm remembering something joint tenants there. I feel like there's a difference between there's some sort of thing where when you own it together, you both live there. But if somebody moves out, they don't still own a piece of it versus the different one. Oh, tenants in common. Maybe that tenants in That's in the answers. Maybe tenants in common was the one where they don't own it and joint tenants is the one they both own it. Remember that. I don't know if that's going to come into play here. So married, child, and he were divorced. Is interesting because it's a little bit about wills here too, maybe possibly. Then again, okay, Wendy though the title remained in the names of both Hubert and Wendy, but it does say Hubert moved out of state conveying all his title and interest in the land by deed to Kelly. That seems more important than the stuff before that. He

0:31:09 Thomas: Without will. Without a will, stuff just goes. I think there's an automatic succession of stuff, I'm pretty sure. I don't know if that's going to matter because like if you already conveyed it. OK, I think a key question will be possibly whether or not Hubert still owned anything anyway, because like, if he moved, there might be something where if he had like moved anyway and they divorced and the. Mother and daughter were just living there and he wasn't maybe he already lost out on it or maybe something as a joint tenants but one way or the other I like if it was his to give to someone then the thing where he moved out of state and conveyed his title in the land by deed that would already do that and I don't think the will matters like the will or not a will I guess maybe they put that in there just in case like hypothetically he could have had it in his will to go to somebody else, but I don't even know if that would have worked if he already granted it by deed or conveyed it by to Kelly. So I think that doesn't, I think the without a will doesn't matter. I think got burned last time for thinking something didn't matter though. Has title to the land? Well, I

0:32:11 Thomas: As I look at the answer, every single one has Wendy. So that sucks. All right, darn it. Sometimes that eliminates something for us, but it didn't in this case. Because, and hasn't moved and still lives there. So it's definitely Wendy. Okay. Like the Wendy owns one half and Hubert's lawyer owns one -half as tenants by the entirety. If if that's a real answer, I'm in trouble. I've never heard of that. I can't imagine that. So I'm going to eliminate B. I think that's giving me a freebie there. B seems like a joke. So A is windy. I I think windy is possible. Okay. So because real property is so hard, I'm gonna go ahead and think about how each one could be possible. Windy could be if it's the kind of tenancy thing where once you leave, you don't have any claim to it. So then therefore, once Hubert kind of moved out, He didn't own it and it was just Wendy. And therefore, when he tried to give it to the daughter, nothing happened. And also when he died without a will, nothing happens. So like, that's how I think, I don't know if that's true, but that's a could be right. Just, I'm remembering something. Joint tenets, taking Gosh, it's not coming to me for sure. Like, my instinct is that joint tenants would be that they each own half. Tenants in common would be. Yeah, actually, that makes sense. Tenant in common is like they each kind of own the whole thing, but then it's transferable, I think. I think that's what it was. Yeah. There was one where it's non -transferable. Like you own something and if you die, your heirs don't have any claim to it. Makes sense. Like, what if it was like, yeah, imagine like, okay, imagine a marriage and one partner dies, but they were just married and they own the house together. Would make sense that you would want that ownership to kind of end because like, what

0:33:56 Thomas: By blood that nobody has anything to do with. But, you know, then the law would make that person own half your house if you're like the remaining partner. So, yeah, I think that's well, I suppose, you I guess if you were married, then maybe it would go to your partner. But anyway, point is, I feel like that at least makes sense as a way to avoid that. Like you just both live in a place and you own it. And it's not a situation where like when one person dies, the goes to someone else. Like that makes sense to me. Whereas when it's something like a company, like I think is a little different. Okay. So I think I'm going to hope that's tenants in common. Although joint tenants. Okay, so Wendy and Kelly as joint tenants is answer C. So I'm limiting B. A, Wendy is alive. B is just nonsense. If B is right, whatever, you win. I don't care. I'm not a lawyer. C, Wendy and Kelley as joint tenets. Okay, that seems like the straightforward, at second choice answer, or maybe not even second. That seems like one of the straightforward options because it's like, well, it comes to, because it's, who has title to the land, title to land? It's not like when you have a kid, they don't automatically have title to The Land. I've never thought about that. I mean, they may, they have like some right to it via inheritance, I guess, but they don, it's like they own your house because you had them. At least I hope not. Otherwise I gotta, I gotta start writing some contracts for my kids. Sign them to really unfair, no. C to be right, it would have to be because Hubert moved out of state and then conveyed the title and interest in the land by D .D. Kelly. That would have worked, which actually seems plausible. I feel like a possibility that if this was the kind of tenancy or whatever, if this is a kind of arrangement where moving meant you're kind of out of it, then that's one thing. But if not, if they both own it. It would make sense that the husband could convey his interest to the daughter, in which case it would also make sense. That then Wendy and the daughter of the mother and daughter would then be joint tenants like that. At least is a possibility. So A is alive and C is alive. D, Wendy and Kelly as tenants in common. A curveball that is. Tenants in common? How would that be correct? Don't know what tenants in common is. I could imagine it being something. Right. If you have a kid and they're in there in your house, I guess they have to be technically be something. Right. Or are they just a dependent? Like, is there some way? And it's not really a legal term, I Guess. But like, are they something? My thinking is like maybe this tenants in Common arises from the fact that Wendy and Kelly just live together. And so this answer is like not really anything to do with Hubert and the tragic motorcycle accident. The conveying the title. This has to do with like basically Hubert left and Kelly is there. So just by having been kind of born into this home, Kelly is a tenant in common. That's my only thinking on D. a total, again, total guess because we're in real property. I don't know how anything works. Bundle of stick analysis help me here? Because bundle of sticks used to be. Way to try to get at certain real property stuff. I think it doesn't help because I just don't know the terminology. Joint tenants. We both own this bundle of sticks versus a bundle of stick owners in common. One seems like, like the in common one does seem more like the one where if you leave or die, then the other person just has it. Does seem like terminology wise, it seems more like it. So I think I'm going to go ahead and say joint tenants means they had each had an interest in the property that would that they could do something with. Is that right? Right. I think I'm gonna have to go with that. I'm settling on that. Which would therefore mean, I think when he moved out of state and conveyed all his title and interest in land. Deed to Kelly that she would also become then just gets his spot like she gets his sticks. Then it would be so that would be see Wendy and Kelly's joint tenants. Think Wendy and Kellyanne as tenants in common might just be that might just Be kind of a trick curveball or I mean, maybe it's the test being kind by giving me the terminology tenants in Common to help me remember that there's two different things or at least two different Things here I think I'm going to eliminate D. I think between A and C, I think my leading theories are either had an interest that he could convey, in which case it's C, or he didn't, in

0:38:12 Thomas: I think that Hubert still had a claim to it or do I think not joint tenants? I think joint tenants is the one where you do own half of it. That's why it's joint. I think it makes sense. Whereas tenants in common might be the thing where you both own all of it, but it's not transferable possibly or something. So I'm going to go with that and I'm gonna say C, Wendy and Kelly is joint tenants. Second chance answer A, Wendy. And I have no confidence in this whatsoever because it's real property, but hey, doing my best. So final answer C, second chance answer, A. All right. If you'd like to play along, check on blue sky, follow open args. Most of the time it's there. I'm going to go ahead and say 75 % of the thing you should do. Well, no. First thing you shouldn't do is become a patron at patreon .com. That's where all the Clarence Thomases go to play. That is where the best of the best get their shoutouts. Not that, and or, you can do both. Go to reddit .com slash r slash open args. Play there. The thing tracks scores. It's a lot of fun. Good interaction. Also check Blue Sky. Right, Heather. Well this sucked. I'm excited to see who owns what next week. So until next time.

0:39:13 Heather: You next time.

0:39:17 Clip: Thank you for being, say we started from the bottom, now we're here, girl.

0:39:26 Thomas: There's only one thing left to do. And that is to thank our patrons, the amazing, beautiful folks who make this show happen at patreon .com slash law. And Lydia's back to help.

0:39:37 Lydia: I am. I would never miss this.

0:39:40 Thomas: Patrons are so important and so cool. Yeah, that she traveled back from wherever you were to help thank them. I'll start with the new patrons. Thank you to Ratiba Vibilet. Took legal advice. This is a journey. This is okay.

0:39:43 Lydia: Did. Journey.

0:39:55 Thomas: Stand by.

0:39:54 Lydia: Okay, okay.

0:39:55 Thomas: I took illegal advice from a podcast. Then I fought the law and I won then the law fought me back and the law won then I fought and then it just comes off yeah so I don't know tell tell me the rest of that story maybe next week or something lots true maybe to james s ali or Christine O'Don I don't know but there's an apostrophe so what do you think that's

0:40:05 Lydia: Never know. Geez. They're in jail. That feels like it's, you I Ireland. So it's odon

0:40:25 Thomas: What it looks like yeah you so much new patrons you're amazing I hope you enjoy not hearing ads and now what we've all been waiting for what's so millions across the country have tuned in for it's time to thank the hall of fame patrons these are the amazing folks who pledge at above for at least a month, are, and I've checked this, the best. Are none better. And every week. I have the honor of going first this week. So I want to thank UnreMerkable, Casey Kahn, Cannots Survive Unregulated Capitalism, Treadaway, Mother of Harridans. Zoran Mamdani for New York City Mayor. Absolutely. Trans kids. Also, the new team is stellar and the pod is better than ever. Oh, thank you so much. Man am regal a german am I can you tell what that was palindrome I that's what you meant cyanide Cyanitis. Disappointed in all the capitulating to fascism. Yeah. Ward. Fourth Circuit attorney reluctantly changing her font. Sex and gender are different things. Apprentice of adventure. Still rooting for the hamburgers to deliver more timely justice than the current system. Unfrozen caveman lawyer. Nick Fish. Vehicular man's laughter is out of battery. Hurry. Ooh, uh-oh. Someone, someone

0:41:19 Lydia: So nice yeah is it an anagram that's what I mean yeah wait

0:41:55 Thomas: Go quick.

0:41:56 Lydia: He was out of battery last week too

0:41:58 Thomas: Oh, well, okay. So he's dead. So nevermind. Don't go. You don't, don't hurry. You know, don't rush. Yeah. It's already over. The unborn fetus doll suicide bomber. Huh? All right. That a reference to something that I don't know?

0:42:03 Lydia: Point I don't

0:42:13 Thomas: Okay. A negative phenomenon. Cavalry. Irregardless of anything, Gretzky is only three goals from the record love it you gotta fight for your right to ex parte jay sank thomas's ai soda mayor girlfriend yes please the unexamined milk is not worth drinking I like that look I finally changed my name for real legally thomas freeman and E.T., so good those were fun I got I might have gotten the good one sorry no were great your turn though you may have even better matter, patrons.

0:42:12 Lydia: Know I don' t know it either then we'll see we'll see alright let's hear it for Cajunkilla fraud fishy hates everything Chris Simpson love the extra episodes I love the Democrats fecklessness is my fetish baby gun control works see Australia this Schultz The Cincinnati Kid, Bob Loblaw's Law.... Podcast, Philly Basement Bar is Back Open and Isn't Taking This Shit Lying Down, Elect Thomas Smith President, American Honkytonk Bar Association, Baltakatei, Philip Kizer, One If By Land, Two If By D.C., Lan, Hors d'oeuvres in the court before we report, A String of Unpronounceable Characters, Malaika Chandler, Milo Meadsong is fighting petty tyrants, Malcolm the Dragon, The Precious Variant, RhondaTheDork.com, Big Easy Blasphemy, FRED R GROOTHUIS, Chris Waltrip, Classic libtard, and Mitchell.

0:43:36 Thomas: Right. Thank you, top patrons. You are the best. Mitchell is the champ, as usual, still. Someone should go for Mitchell. Don't tell Mitchell I said that, but someone should. You, Hall of Famers. Love the names this week. It felt like we got a lot of changes. That's fun.

0:43:50 Lydia: It was fresh.

0:43:50 Thomas: Yeah. It makes it even more enjoyable for us. Times. Right. Well, that's our show. You so much, patrons. Thanks to Heather as always for beating me up again and making me feel real bad about myself. That

0:44:03 Lydia: My intro did not age well.

0:44:06 Thomas: It's appropriate. Want to set up the expectations before failing them. You know, it doesn't work if you don't set up expectations. It's just comedy. Anyway, thanks for joining for the shout outs as usual.

0:44:14 Lydia: That's true. That's true. Favorite part of the week.

0:44:22 Thomas: We'll see you for Rapid Response Friday.

0:44:24 Clip: This podcast is a production of Opening Arguments Media, LLC, All Rights Reserved. It is produced and edited by Thomas Smith, who also provided the fabulous intro and outro music used with permission.

0:44:42 Thomas: Can't just take people's things, can you?

0:44:44 Heather: Want that mfr to reimburse me for I'm going to light this motorcycle on fire, like,