Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
  • H
  • Humphrey v. C.G. Jung Educational CenterHumphrey v. C.G. Jung Educational Center
From our private database of 16,800+ case briefs...

Humphrey v. C.G. Jung Educational Center

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
714 F.2d 477 (1983)


The Humphrey and the Caldwell families owned several lots of property located in Block 8 of a Houston development. In 1920, the Humphreys and the Caldwells sold one of these lots, Lot F, to Tom Randolph. The general warranty deed had several restrictive provisions, including a provision that the property could be used for residential purposes only and not as a store or shop. The provisions also included language to the effect that the restrictions were covenants running with the land. Further, the deed provided that, if the property owner failed to comply with any provisions of the covenant, the grantors could sue to force compliance or stop further violations, or the property would revert back to the grantors if the grantors elected. Neither the Humphrey nor the Caldwell families owned any property in Block 8 after 1942. In 1972, Lot F was sold to Jasper Galleries (defendant), which demolished the existing residence and built an art gallery. In 1975, Jasper Galleries conveyed Lot F to Carolyn Fay. Fay rented the property to C.G. Jung Education Center of Houston and Archway Galleries (defendants). In 1976, several descendants of the Humphrey family who originally owned Lot F (plaintiffs) sued, alleging that the defendants were using Lot F in violation of the restrictions contained in the 1920 deed. At trial, the defendants argued that the deed provision should be construed as a covenant. The damages available for breach of covenant are limited to injunctive relief and damages. The plaintiffs argued that the provision was a condition subsequent. The damages available for breach of a condition subsequent include reclaiming title to the property. The trial court found for the defendants. The plaintiffs appealed.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Brown, J.)

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 449,000 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 449,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 16,800 briefs, keyed to 224 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.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial