Rogers v. Watson
Vermont Supreme Court
594 A.2d 409 (1991)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Edwina Bard (plaintiff) subdivided a parcel of land into a residential development. Except for the first lot sold and the lot Bard sold to her family, the deeds to the lots prohibited mobile homes or similar structures. Charles and Hazel Wilkinson purchased one of the lots from Bard. The Wilkinsons subdivided their lot and sold part of it to Gerald and Kay Watson (defendants). The deed to the Watsons did not contain the covenant restricting the use of mobile homes. The Watsons placed a mobile home on their lot. Bard and neighboring property owners (plaintiffs) brought suit seeking to enforce the restrictive covenant that was in the Wilkinsons’ deed. The Watsons conceded that the covenant was in writing, touched and concerned the land, and that privity of estate existed between the parties. The Watsons claimed, however, that the original parties did not intend that the covenant would run with the land. The trial court held the covenant enforceable against the Watsons and granted the plaintiffs an injunction. The Watsons appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dooley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
