Interpreting estates in land: presumption against forfeitures or grantor’s intent

Traditionally, courts adopt a “presumption against forfeitures” so that an ambiguous conveyance will not be interpreted to create a future interest. Many courts still retain this interpretive presumption which is not focused on the probably intent of the grantor but on the public policy goal of promoting the alienability of land and freeing current owners from forfeiture of their title. See, e.g.,  Carter Country Club, Inc. v. Carter Comty. Bldg. Ass’n, 273 A.3d 915 (N.H. 2021) (““We generally disfavor interpreting deed conditions in a manner that would cause a forfeiture of the property upon breach of such conditions.”). But see id. (“However, we adhere to the guiding principle that the intent of the parties should be effectuated whenever possible.”). But other courts focus on effectuating the grantor’s intent even if that results in a future interest and a forfeiture of the present estate in land. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs of St. Mary’s County v. Aiken, 296 A.3d 933 (Md. 2023) (“To determine the “extent of an estate or interest granted by a deed,” we construe the deed “so as to best effectuate the intention of the parties.”).