Cordogan v. Union National Bank of Elgin
Illinois Appellate Court
380 N.E.2d 1194 (1978)
- Written by Jennifer Flinn, JD
Facts
Wauchope (defendant) developed a subdivision named Riverside Manor No. 1 and established a restrictive covenant on the lots of the subdivision that allowed only single-family dwellings to be built on the lots. Soon after, Wauchope purchased land surrounding the subdivision, developed Riverside Manor No. 2, and sold some of the land to commercial developers. The property around the Riverside Manor No. 1 was developed into a variety of commercial establishments, including several hotels, a manufacturing building, a trailer camp, a college campus, and other commercial buildings. These properties, all once owned by Wauchope, were sold to developers without restrictive covenants. Wauchope still owned lots 18, 19, and 20 of Riverside Manor No. 1, all of which remained vacant. These lots were the closest to a highway frontage road and near the service area of a hotel. Wauchope was unable to sell these lots as single-family dwellings, so he began the process to build a duplex apartment building on these lots. The owners of other lots in Riverside Manor No. 1 (plaintiffs) filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction to prevent Wauchope from building the apartment building on lots 18, 19, and 20 based on the restrictive covenant that had been established for the lots. The trial court ruled in favor of the owners and granted a permanent injunction to prevent Wauchope from building anything other than single-family dwellings on the lots. Wauchope appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rechenmacher, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.