Forster v. Hall

In August 1978, Goose Creek Partnership acquired land located in Tazewell County, Virginia. The land was platted as five sections to establish the Goose Creek Estates residential subdivision. Sections one, two, and three did not contain any restrictive covenants. Sections four and five contained restrictive covenants pertaining to water and sewer service. However, when the lots were sold, each deed contained a restrictive covenant prohibiting mobile homes from being parked or erected on the property. In 1994 James and Joyce Hall (defendants) purchased a lot in the subdivision, and the deed contained a restriction prohibiting mobile homes. In 1996 Richard Forster (plaintiff) purchased a lot from Thomas and Angela Kelly. The deed from Goose Creek Partnership to the Kellys contained a restriction prohibiting mobile homes. Forster then purchased a second lot in the subdivision by auction. The original deed from the auction did not contain a restriction prohibiting mobile homes. However, a corrective deed containing the restriction was recorded shortly thereafter. The Halls also purchased a second lot in the subdivision by auction. The Halls expressly requested that the deed from the auction not contain the restriction against mobile homes, and the conveyance was made without the restriction. In 1997 the Halls utilized their second lot for mobile homes. Forster filed a complaint against the Halls in Tazewell County Circuit Court, seeking a determination that the lots were subject to an implied reciprocal negative easement and that the restriction could be enforced by any lot owner within the subdivision. Forster also sought injunctive relief. The Halls denied that their lot was subject to an implied negative reciprocal easement. The chancellor found that an implied reciprocal negative easement was established for all the lots in the subdivision, and the Halls appealed.