Tennessee Senate Bill SB0896

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 66, Chapter 1, relative to real property.

Summary

SB0896 would change Tennessee real property law by limiting and, in many cases, eliminating long-term reverter and forfeiture provisions tied to certain common-law defeasible fee estates. The bill addresses fee simple determinable, fee simple subject to condition subsequent, and fee simple subject to executory limitation, which are forms of ownership that can cause property to revert or be forfeited if a stated condition is violated. The stated purpose is to improve certainty of title and reduce restraints on alienation. Under the bill, reverter or forfeiture provisions in instruments executed more than 75 years before July 1, 2025, would be abolished and unenforceable. For conveyances creating these interests on or after July 1, 2025, such provisions would be invalid from the start. For older interests still in existence as of July 1, 2025, the bill creates a transition rule: the interest generally terminates 75 years after creation unless a sworn statement is filed in the county register of deeds by July 1, 2026, which would extend the reverter provision once for five additional years before the property becomes fee simple absolute.

Impact

The bill would amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 66, Chapter 1, by adding a new section that effectively abolishes future use of certain defeasible fee arrangements and sunsets many existing reverter and forfeiture rights. It would convert affected property interests into fee simple absolute ownership once the statutory period expires, and it bars lawsuits to recover or forfeit property based on the terminated reversionary interest. The practical effect is to strengthen marketable title, reduce uncertainty in land records, and limit the ability of grantors or successors to enforce old deed restrictions.

Sentiment

The bill appears generally favorable and reform-oriented, with the legislative findings expressing a clear policy preference for certainty of title and against perpetual restraints on alienation. No committee transcript or recorded vote information was provided, so there is no evidence of formal opposition or debate in the materials supplied. Based on the text alone, the measure is framed as a property-title cleanup bill rather than a controversial policy change.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the bill’s retroactive effect on existing property interests, especially for owners or heirs who rely on long-standing reverter or forfeiture clauses to preserve a use restriction or future interest. Property owners, land trusts, churches, families, or other grantors who created conditional gifts may view the bill as impairing vested expectations, while title professionals, developers, and buyers are likely to support it for the clarity it brings. Another possible issue is the short window for filing a sworn statement to preserve certain older interests, which could be seen as burdensome or easy to miss.