## Facts

- Vernon P. Long died in 1957 owning contiguous farm parcels totaling about 342 acres in two Iowa counties.
- The will gave Ermabeth Long (widow) a life estate with the right to collect and use rents and profits.
- Upon Ermabeth’s death, the will gave Margaret Kathryn Long and Bernard Wayne Long (the children) successive life estates as tenants in common (or to the survivor), with a remainder in fee “per stirpes to the heirs of their bodies.”
- At the time of suit, Ermabeth was unmarried; both children were adults, unmarried, and childless, with uncertainty whether either would have children.
- The farm was described as hilly, erosion-prone, and in disrepair; income was insufficient to maintain or improve it; experts valued it at about $375 per acre.
- Ermabeth petitioned for judicial authorization to sell the real estate and for appointment of a trustee to administer and preserve the sale proceeds for present and future interest holders.
- Margaret and Bernard joined in requesting the sale; a guardian ad litem represented unknown heirs and other contingent claimants.
- A separate dispute concerned whether farm tenant Kenneth Crum received effective statutory notice terminating his tenancy; he refused to accept the notice.

## Issues

1. Whether Iowa Code § 557.9 authorizes a court, in its discretion, to order sale of land subject to successive life estates and contingent remainder interests when the life tenant and those holding a vested (though defeasible) reversion consent, but ultimate remaindermen are unascertainable.
2. Whether a tenant’s refusal to accept a statutory notice of termination renders the notice ineffective.

## Decision

- Reversed and remanded.
- The court held the district court had authority under Iowa Code § 557.9 to consider and, in its discretion, authorize a sale despite contingent remainder interests because the required consents were supplied by the holders of the vested reversionary interest.
- The court rejected the trial court’s “extreme necessity” limitation as an incorrect legal standard under the post-1947 statute.
- The court held a tenant cannot defeat statutory termination notice by refusing to accept delivery; refusal constitutes compliance with notice requirements.
- The district court was directed to proceed under the correct statutory standard and reconsider the requested sale and related protective arrangements for proceeds.

## Legal Principles

- Under Iowa Code § 557.9, judicial authority to order sale of property burdened by life estates and future interests can exist even when ultimate takers are contingent or unascertainable, so long as statutory consent requirements are met by those legally capable of consenting.
- A reversionary interest that is vested at the testator’s death but defeasible upon a future event (e.g., birth of issue) can satisfy statutory “consent” requirements for a court-authorized sale.
- A court may protect contingent future interests in a sale by ensuring representation (e.g., guardian ad litem) and by structuring relief to preserve the corpus through management of proceeds (e.g., a trustee-administered fund).
- Statutory notice requirements for termination of a tenancy are satisfied when notice is properly tendered; a tenant’s refusal to accept the notice does not invalidate it.

## Conclusion

The Iowa Supreme Court held that Iowa Code § 557.9 permits a court to authorize sale of land subject to successive life estates and contingent remainders when the vested reversioners consent, and it also held that a tenant cannot nullify termination by refusing to accept statutory notice; the case was remanded for discretionary consideration under the proper standard.


Long v. Crum, 267 N.W.2d 407 (Iowa 1978)