The Rule in Wild's Case is a common law rule of construction that was formulated in a case before the Court of King's Bench in 1599. It concerns a particular type of ambiguity in devises (such as grants or bequests) of real property: If a grantor (O) grants, by deed or will, property to another person (A) with the language "To A and her children", who gets lawful possession of the property?
"Wild's Case" concerned some land that had been inherited via a remainder to "Rowland Wild and his wife, and after their decease to their children." Wild and his wife had died, and their son had died; should the son's daughter have the land?
in Lord Coke's report of Wild's Case two propositions were stated which have become known as the "First Resolution in Wild's Case" and the "Second Resolution in Wild's Case":
This rule has fallen into disuse in those jurisdictions which no longer recognize the fee tail as a legal estate. Some U.S. states ignore the rule altogether, and interpret such a grant as giving a life estate and creating a remainder in her children. Section 14.2 of the Restatement (Third) of Property repudiates the Rule in Wild's Case, suggesting that many authorities consider it to be obsolete.
Notes
References
Reading Dukeminier, Jesse, Johansen, Stanley M., Lindgren, James, and Sitkoff, Robert. Wills, Trusts, and Estates, 7th Edition, p. 664. Aspen Publishers, 2005.