Runyon v. Paley case brief summary
416 S.E.2d 177 (1992)
CASE FACTS
Defendant property owners acquired property that was originally conveyed with restrictive covenants by a grantor, who retained a nearby parcel and also conveyed another lot to plaintiff neighboring property owners. Upon the grantor's death, plaintiff daughter acquired the grantor's property. Plaintiffs sought to enjoin defendants from constructing condominiums, claiming that defendants' property was subject to restrictive covenants that prohibited the construction.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The court of appeals affirmed the trial court dismissal of plaintiffs' action.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court reversed that part of the court of appeals judgment that affirmed the dismissal of the action of plaintiff grantor's daughter's claim and affirmed that part that affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff neighboring property owners' claim. The court held that plaintiff daughter had presented sufficient evidence to show that the covenants were real covenants enforceable by her as an owner of property retained by her mother, the covenantee.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
416 S.E.2d 177 (1992)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiffs, grantor's daughter and
neighboring property owners, appealed from a judgment of the Court of
Appeals (North Carolina) that affirmed an order of dismissal of
plaintiff's suit to enjoin defendant property owners from
constructing waterfront condominium units. Plaintiffs claimed that
defendants' property was subject to restrictive covenants that
prohibited the construction of the condominiums.CASE FACTS
Defendant property owners acquired property that was originally conveyed with restrictive covenants by a grantor, who retained a nearby parcel and also conveyed another lot to plaintiff neighboring property owners. Upon the grantor's death, plaintiff daughter acquired the grantor's property. Plaintiffs sought to enjoin defendants from constructing condominiums, claiming that defendants' property was subject to restrictive covenants that prohibited the construction.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The court of appeals affirmed the trial court dismissal of plaintiffs' action.
DISCUSSION
- On appeal, the court held that plaintiff daughter presented sufficient evidence to show that the covenants were real covenants enforceable by her as owner of property retained by her mother, the covenantee.
- Accordingly, the court reversed that part of the court of appeals' decision that affirmed the trial court's dismissal of her claim.
- However, the court affirmed that part of the court of appeals' decision that dismissed plaintiff neighboring property owners' claim because they failed to show that they had standing to enforce the restrictive covenants, either personally or as owners of any land intended to be benefitted by the restrictions.
CONCLUSION
The court reversed that part of the court of appeals judgment that affirmed the dismissal of the action of plaintiff grantor's daughter's claim and affirmed that part that affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff neighboring property owners' claim. The court held that plaintiff daughter had presented sufficient evidence to show that the covenants were real covenants enforceable by her as an owner of property retained by her mother, the covenantee.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment