Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Fink v. Miller

Court of Appeals of Utah
896 P.2d 649 (1995)


Facts

C. W. Fink (plaintiff) and Shannon and Jim Miller (defendants) both purchased lots in a subdivision subject to protective covenants. The covenants required wood shingles on the roofs of all structures. The covenants further required the approval of building plans by the Community Development Committee. Prior to 1985, the committee received a copy of the covenant agreement with a handwritten addition allowing alternative roofing materials. Consequently, the committee approved plans calling for tile or fiberglass/asphalt shingle roofs prior to 1985. In 1985, the committee learned the covenant had not actually been amended. However, by the end of 1985, some 21 homes had been completed with either tile or fiberglass/asphalt shingle roofs. The committee sought to enforce the restriction to wood shingles after 1985. In 1990, when the Millers requested approval to change their building plans to call for fiberglass shingles, the committee denied their request. The Millers began installing the fiberglass shingles without committee approval. In 1991, Fink sued seeking an injunction to prevent the Millers from installing fiberglass shingles. The trial court granted summary judgment for the Millers, and Fink appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Orme, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 204,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.