Assuming the conditions subsequent in a deed to SCST were subject to the Marketable Record Title Act, they remained enforceable by injunction (but not power of termination) as equitable servitudes.  (Civ. Code 885.060(c).)  The trial court erred in employing the forfeiture doctrine to convert one of the conditions subsequent (which required sale of the property to Claremont at a set price) if SCST stopped using it for a college.  The condition subsequent expressly allocated the risk of changed value of the property between the parties.  It was no forfeiture to enforce that bargain, even though doing so deprived SCST of the considerable appreciation in land values which had occurred during the 60 years it had owned the property.