Morris v. Kadrmas

812 P.2d 549 (1991)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Morris v. Kadrmas

Wyoming Supreme Court
812 P.2d 549 (1991)

Facts

Greg Morris (plaintiff), a subdivision lot owner, sued Wayne and Shirley Kadrmas (defendants), adjacent subdivision lot owners, and the subdivision’s Land Owners Committee (the committee) (defendant) to enforce restrictive covenants. Morris alleged that the Kadrmases and the committee violated the covenants when the committee approved the Kadrmases’ plans to construct a garage on their lot without an accompanying residential structure and in violation of restrictions regarding set-back distances and approved roofing materials and the Kadrmases then constructed the garage according to their proposed plans and specifications. The subdivision’s declarations contained restrictive covenants, which ran with each lot, limited each lot to residential purposes exclusively, and vested compliance and approval authority in the committee and the right of enforcement in each lot owner. The covenants allowed the committee some discretion to make exceptions to some of the building requirements, but not to the requirement for an accompanying residential structure. The trial court dismissed the actions against the Kadrmases and the committee. Morris appealed the decision granting summary judgment in favor of the Kadrmases and denying his motion for summary judgment and issuance of an injunction ordering the Kadrmases to raze their garage. None of the parties contested that the garage the Kadrmases constructed on their lot did not comply with restrictive covenants prohibiting customary outbuildings without an accompanying residence or that the garage violated additional restrictions regarding set-back distances and approved roofing materials. The Kadrmases argued on appeal that notwithstanding those violations, the construction of his garage was proper because the committee approved it, and they argued that because Morris failed to appeal the summary judgment in favor of the committee, Morris could not proceed against the Kadrmases to enforce the restrictive covenants because Morris’s quarrel was with the committee.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rooney, 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 736,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 736,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 736,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership