Palmetto Dunes Resort v. Brown

336 S.E. 2d 15 (1985)

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

Palmetto Dunes Resort v. Brown

South Carolina Court of Appeals
336 S.E. 2d 15 (1985)

Facts

Palmetto Dunes Resort (Palmetto Dunes) (plaintiff) sued lot owner George Brown (defendant) to prevent Brown from constructing a house on his lot in the resort. The covenants restricted lot owners in residential areas from building without prior approval from the Palmetto Dunes Architectural Review Board, which was authorized to reject plans for “purely aesthetic considerations.” The preamble to the covenant stated that its purpose was to “assure and preserve certain high standards of aesthetics and materials . . . and to create certain procedures to enable the community to permanently control the quality of its neighborhoods.” Written building guidelines provided that board reviews were concerned with “all elements of aesthetics” and defined “major considerations” to include “(1) how the house [would] look to neighbors (2) color of stain (3) roof line (4) window treatments and exposure (5) general harmony with area and natural surroundings [and] (6) landscaping.” The guidelines also warned that it was not uncommon for the board to withhold its final approval and to make “suggestions for improvement that [its] experience [has] shown to be wise.” Despite having previously approved similar plans, the board twice rejected Brown’s plans, citing aesthetics and noting that the garage front and roofline overpowered the proposed house. When Palmetto Dunes discovered trees marked for cutting and stakes placed as if construction was imminent, it obtained a temporary order restraining Brown from starting construction on his lot. The trial court granted Palmetto Dunes’ request for a permanent injunction over Brown’s objections that the restrictive covenant subjecting his construction plans to the board’s aesthetic judgment was unenforceable and that even if it was enforceable, the board acted unreasonably in denying his plan. On appeal, Brown argued that there was a lack of objective standards to guide board decisions in the covenant, which Brown urged should be strictly construed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Sanders, C.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 734,000 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 734,000 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 734,000 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