## Facts

- In 1927, multiple grantors conveyed land to a municipal park and recreation commission to create and operate a public park and golf course in Charlotte.
- One deed conveyed land for a park “for white people only” and stated that if the premises were not so reserved, the land would revert to the grantor (and heirs or assigns).
- Another deed limited use to white people but did not expressly provide for forfeiture or reverter upon breach.
- A city deed in the chain also included a racial limitation and a reverter clause; a separate grantor later executed a quitclaim releasing any reversionary rights he might have held.
- In 1951, Black residents sought to use the golf course and were denied solely because of race; they asserted constitutional violations because the course was a public facility.
- The commission filed a declaratory judgment action against grantors and the excluded residents to determine the title consequences if it admitted non-white users.

## Issues

1. Whether the deed containing “white people only” language plus reverter language created a fee simple determinable in the commission, automatically ending upon non-white use and reverting to the grantor or successors.
2. Whether the deed containing “white people only” language but no reverter/forfeiture language created a defeasible fee, or instead imposed a restriction not enforceable by automatic forfeiture.
3. Whether the declaratory judgment procedure properly allowed adjudication of the parties’ respective interests in the affected tracts.

## Decision

- The court affirmed that the deed with an express racial limitation and reverter created a fee simple determinable (base/qualified fee) in the commission with a possibility of reverter in the grantor; admitting non-white users would automatically terminate the commission’s estate in that tract.
- The court affirmed that the deed lacking clear reverter/forfeiture language did not create a determinable fee; admission of non-white users would not cause forfeiture of that tract.
- The court upheld the trial court’s authority to resolve the controversy under the state declaratory judgment statute.

## Legal Principles

- A fee simple determinable is created when a conveyance grants a fee simple and provides that the estate automatically expires upon a stated event; no fixed formula is required if the grantor’s intent to terminate automatically is clearly expressed.
- When land is granted for a particular use and the instrument shows the grantor intended the estate to end upon cessation of that use without re-entry, the estate is properly characterized as a fee simple determinable.
- Forfeitures are disfavored; restrictions will not be construed to create an automatic termination or forfeiture absent clear language of special limitation or reverter.
- Declaratory judgment is appropriate to determine the rights and interests of all parties where an actual controversy exists over how proposed conduct would affect title.

## Conclusion

The court treated an express “white-only” use limitation coupled with reverter language as creating a fee simple determinable that would automatically end upon desegregation, while refusing to impose forfeiture where a similar racial restriction lacked clear termination language, and it approved declaratory relief to clarify the resulting property interests.


Charlotte Park & Recreation Comm’n v. Barringer, 242 N.C. 311, 88 S.E.2d 114 (N.C. 1955)