The Turknetts were the original fee simple owners of the property at issue. By two separate deeds, they conveyed life estates in two separate parcels of land to their daughters. Both deed provided that, upon the death of the daughter, the property would go absolutely to the children of the daughter. If the daughter died without children, the land was to go to her estate, to be distributed according to her will, or to her heirs at law. At the time these deeds were executed, neither daughter had any children. Subsequent deeds were executed in favor of both daughters which purported to convey absolute title to the same lands covered in the original deeds. After all of the deeds had been executed, both daughters had children (D). Both daughters also attempted to convey fee simple interests in the land to the predecessors of Abo (P). D argues that since the 1908 deeds conveyed life estates only, that is all the daughters could have conveyed to P's predecessors. P argues that the subsequent deeds vested the daughters with fee simple interests and that their predecessors, therefore, took fee simple title. The court found that the original deeds created life estates with alternative contingent remainders in D and in the daughters' estates and that therefore, the Turknetts retained a reversionary interest in the property after executing the original deeds.