What was the result in Cunningham v. Hastings, where two unmarried people purchased
a home as joint tenants, one party made the down payment, and there was a dispute
regarding whether that party was entitled to a larger portion of the proceeds when the
house was sold, in order to compensate for the down payment?
A) Because the parties were unmarried, the party who made the down payment received
a larger portion of the proceeds from the sale, to account for the down payment.
B) Regardless of whether the parties were married, the party who made the down
payment received a larger portion of the proceeds from the sale, to account for the down
payment.
C) Because the parties were unmarried they could not own the property as joint tenants,
and under principles of equity, the party who made the down payment received a larger
portion of the proceeds from the sale to account for the down payment.
D) Because the parties were unmarried, they owned the property as tenants by the
entirety, and the party who made the down payment was denied a larger share of the
sale proceeds to account for the down payment.
E) Because the parties owned the property as joint tenants, the party who made the
down payment was denied a larger share of the sale proceeds, to account for the down
payment.
Ownership of real property in fee simple defeasible means that:
A) the ownership is for only a limited period of time.
B) the ownership is absolute, except that ownership may be lost upon the occurrence or
non-occurrence of some specified event.
C) the property remains titled to the grantor.