Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Hensley-O'Neal v. Metropolitan National Bank Case Brief

Missouri Court of Appeals2009Docket #1991109
297 S.W.3d 610 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1584 2009 WL 3720963 Property Contracts Civil Procedure

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A woman’s preemptive right to purchase land was declared void. The court found that because the agreement was binding on her and the seller’s “heirs and assigns” without a time limit, it violated the common law Rule Against Perpetuities.

Legal Significance: This case affirms that a preemptive right (right of first refusal) that extends to the parties’ heirs and assigns without a specific time limit is void ab initio for violating the Rule Against Perpetuities.

Hensley-O'Neal v. Metropolitan National Bank Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

In 1996, Greg Hensley granted Tanya Hensley-O’Neal (Appellant) a “First Option to Purchase Real Estate,” which was a preemptive right. The agreement stipulated that it gave Appellant the first right to purchase a specific property “if and when Seller shall decide to sell.” Crucially, the contract stated it was “binding upon the executors, administrators, heirs[,] successors and assigns of the Seller, and inure to the executors, administrators, heirs[,] successors and assigns of the Purchaser.” The agreement contained no time limit for its exercise. In 2000, Hensley granted a deed of trust on the property to Metropolitan National Bank (Respondent). In 2002, the Bank foreclosed on the property and purchased it at the sale for $87,750. The Bank offered to sell the property to Appellant for that price, but she made a counteroffer of $40,000, which the Bank rejected. In 2008, the Bank contracted to sell the property to a third party for $79,900. Appellant then sued to enforce her preemptive right at the new, lower price. The trial court granted summary judgment for the Bank, reasoning that Appellant’s right was extinguished when she failed to purchase the property in 2002. Appellant appealed.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a preemptive right to purchase real property violate the Rule Against Perpetuities, and is therefore void, if the creating instrument makes the right binding on the parties’ heirs and assigns but includes no durational limit?

Yes. The preemptive right to purchase was void from its inception because Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cil

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a preemptive right to purchase real property violate the Rule Against Perpetuities, and is therefore void, if the creating instrument makes the right binding on the parties’ heirs and assigns but includes no durational limit?

Conclusion

This case illustrates the strict application of the common law Rule Against Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commod

Legal Rule

A preemptive right to purchase property is an interest subject to the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsu

Legal Analysis

The appellate court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment but Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod temp

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A preemptive right (right of first refusal) that is explicitly binding
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom.

✨ Enjoy an ad-free experience with LSD+