of which I may die seized or possessed

German translation: in meinem Besitz

GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
English term or phrase:of which I may die seized or possessed
German translation:in meinem Besitz
Entered by: Trans-Marie

18:41 Apr 11, 2005
English to German translations [PRO]
Law/Patents - Law: Contract(s)
English term or phrase: of which I may die seized or possessed
FOURTH: All the rest, residue and remainder of the property, both real and personal, tangible and intangible, and wheresoever situate, *of which I may die seized or possessed*, or to which I may be entitled at the time of my death, all the property which is disposed of by this Clause FOURTH being hereinafter sometimes referred to as my "residuary estate", I direct my Executor to divide into two...
Trans-Marie
Local time: 07:54
in meinem Besitz
Explanation:
The term "seize" does not mean "beschlagnehmen" here.

It comes from "seizin" - a form of ownership. It is not having an estate in land, but a way of gaining one, such as through adverse possession (acquiring land without the consent of the paper owner, by working it).

See for example: www.ndcourts/com./court/opinions/900206.htm

"The title of the owner of a freehold estate is described by the terms 'seizin', or 'seizin in fee', yet in a proper legal sense the holder of a legal title is not seized until he is fully invested with the possession, actual or constructive."

It is an antiquated term and I would just translate it as "in meinem Besitz




--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2005-04-11 20:26:16 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Sorry, the correct link to the judgment is

www.ndcourts.com/court/opinions/900206.htm

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2005-04-11 20:32:44 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

More information (from www.genfiles.com/legal/Deeds.htm

A Bit of Useful History


In medieval England, title to land was conveyed in fee simple by a feoffment with livery of seisin. The essence of this was a public ceremony, performed before witnesses, called a livery of seisin.[1] The seller and buyer (feoffer and feoffee) met on the land, where the seller gave to the buyer something symbolic of the land like a twig or handful of earth, and made an oral statement transferring the land. No type of document was needed for this sort of transaction until 1677, when the Statute of Frauds required one for all transfers of land titles.[2]



The Statute of Uses in 1535 effectively created an alternative form of conveyance, the bargain and sale. The seller (bargainor) basically promised to deliver the land to the buyer (bargainee) in exchange for a payment. The Statue of Uses provided that any written document transferring use of the land automatically transferred the title as well.[3] The bargain and sale contract was useful because, unlike livery of seisin, the bargain and sale could take place in private and at a more convenient location than on the land itself. However it had the disadvantage that the Statute of Enrollment in 1536 required that a bargain and sale contract conveying land not only be written down, but also that the deed be enrolled in a public registry.



Another type of conveyance used at this time was the grant, which was used to convey an incorporeal or future interest in land.[4] Due to a peculiarity of the law, a deed of grant could not be used to convey a current interest in land. However, a special form of grant called a release could be used to convey a future interest to someone who already had a current interest. [The modern version is called a quitclaim.] This resulted in a very popular form of conveyance called a lease and release. Two agreements were required. First, a bargain and sale contract was executed by the seller to convey a lease on the land. [Unlike an outright sale, leases did not require enrollment in a public registry.] The seller then separately executed a release to grant to the buyer (who was now his tenant) a reversion of the seller’s interest. Voila! The effect was to transfer title to the buyer, since he now owned both the current and future interests in the land.



Although it might seem that a bargain and sale of land was more straightforward, it did require livery and enrollment. A bargain and sale of a lease required neither. The lease and release thus became popular among those who wished to transact land sales in privacy, such as aristocratic families dividing up ancestral estates. [This was obviously a moot point in America.] In fact, the lease and release was heavily used in England well past the American Revolution, until an 1845 statute permitted the use of grants to transfer title to land.



Selected response from:

Anne Gillard-Groddeck
Local time: 08:54
Grading comment
Vielen Dank Anne, die Erklärung war sehr hilfreich.
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer



Summary of answers provided
4in meinem Besitz
Anne Gillard-Groddeck
3welches zur Zeit meines Todes beschlagnahmt ist oder sich noch in meinem Besitz befindet
Mustafa Er (BSc MA)
2 +1welches zum Zeitpunkt meine Todes beschlagnahmt ist oder sich im Besitz vom Dritten befindet
Derek Gill Franßen


  

Answers


9 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 2/5Answerer confidence 2/5 peer agreement (net): +1
of which i may die seized or possessed
welches zum Zeitpunkt meine Todes beschlagnahmt ist oder sich im Besitz vom Dritten befindet


Explanation:
Ich meine damit Eigentum.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 10 mins (2005-04-11 18:52:25 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Es will einfach nicht!!! \"(Eigentum,) welches zum Zeitpunkt meines Todes beschlagnahmt ist oder sich im Besitz Dritter befindet\" ist was ich eigentlich schreiben wollte (ob es richtig ist, steht auf einem anderen Blatt).
;-)

Derek Gill Franßen
Germany
Local time: 08:54
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: English
PRO pts in category: 242

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Hans G. Liepert: geht doch!
3 mins
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

49 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 3/5Answerer confidence 3/5
of which i may die seized or possessed
welches zur Zeit meines Todes beschlagnahmt ist oder sich noch in meinem Besitz befindet


Explanation:
-

Mustafa Er (BSc MA)
Turkey
Local time: 09:54
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in TurkishTurkish, Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 4
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 hr   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5
in meinem Besitz


Explanation:
The term "seize" does not mean "beschlagnehmen" here.

It comes from "seizin" - a form of ownership. It is not having an estate in land, but a way of gaining one, such as through adverse possession (acquiring land without the consent of the paper owner, by working it).

See for example: www.ndcourts/com./court/opinions/900206.htm

"The title of the owner of a freehold estate is described by the terms 'seizin', or 'seizin in fee', yet in a proper legal sense the holder of a legal title is not seized until he is fully invested with the possession, actual or constructive."

It is an antiquated term and I would just translate it as "in meinem Besitz




--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2005-04-11 20:26:16 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Sorry, the correct link to the judgment is

www.ndcourts.com/court/opinions/900206.htm

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2005-04-11 20:32:44 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

More information (from www.genfiles.com/legal/Deeds.htm

A Bit of Useful History


In medieval England, title to land was conveyed in fee simple by a feoffment with livery of seisin. The essence of this was a public ceremony, performed before witnesses, called a livery of seisin.[1] The seller and buyer (feoffer and feoffee) met on the land, where the seller gave to the buyer something symbolic of the land like a twig or handful of earth, and made an oral statement transferring the land. No type of document was needed for this sort of transaction until 1677, when the Statute of Frauds required one for all transfers of land titles.[2]



The Statute of Uses in 1535 effectively created an alternative form of conveyance, the bargain and sale. The seller (bargainor) basically promised to deliver the land to the buyer (bargainee) in exchange for a payment. The Statue of Uses provided that any written document transferring use of the land automatically transferred the title as well.[3] The bargain and sale contract was useful because, unlike livery of seisin, the bargain and sale could take place in private and at a more convenient location than on the land itself. However it had the disadvantage that the Statute of Enrollment in 1536 required that a bargain and sale contract conveying land not only be written down, but also that the deed be enrolled in a public registry.



Another type of conveyance used at this time was the grant, which was used to convey an incorporeal or future interest in land.[4] Due to a peculiarity of the law, a deed of grant could not be used to convey a current interest in land. However, a special form of grant called a release could be used to convey a future interest to someone who already had a current interest. [The modern version is called a quitclaim.] This resulted in a very popular form of conveyance called a lease and release. Two agreements were required. First, a bargain and sale contract was executed by the seller to convey a lease on the land. [Unlike an outright sale, leases did not require enrollment in a public registry.] The seller then separately executed a release to grant to the buyer (who was now his tenant) a reversion of the seller’s interest. Voila! The effect was to transfer title to the buyer, since he now owned both the current and future interests in the land.



Although it might seem that a bargain and sale of land was more straightforward, it did require livery and enrollment. A bargain and sale of a lease required neither. The lease and release thus became popular among those who wished to transact land sales in privacy, such as aristocratic families dividing up ancestral estates. [This was obviously a moot point in America.] In fact, the lease and release was heavily used in England well past the American Revolution, until an 1845 statute permitted the use of grants to transfer title to land.





Anne Gillard-Groddeck
Local time: 08:54
Works in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 4
Grading comment
Vielen Dank Anne, die Erklärung war sehr hilfreich.
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)



Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.

KudoZ™ translation help

The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.


See also:

Your current localization setting

English

Select a language

Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search