![]() The fourth unnumbered paragraph recites that the grantor as owner of certain land has subdivided it into residence lots, roadways, etc., as shown on an attached map, and that he is desirous of "making provisions for administration of the properties and of creating certain restrictions in regard to the lots therein." The attached map or plat depicts 24 lots, lettered A through X, ranging in size from 6/10ths of an acre to more than 5 acres, with each lot containing a delineated building space and planting areas. The opening sentence of the first unnumbered paragraph begins with this language: "THIS TRUST AGREEMENT AND CONVEYANCE * * *." The second and third paragraphs are unimportant to our decision. It contains eight unnumbered paragraphs, followed by nineteen numbered paragraphs which are followed, in turn, by two more unnumbered paragraphs. The instrument is captioned, "Agreement Creating Shadyside". Only those provisions deemed to be important to our decision will be quoted in this opinion. The instrument is quoted in full in the opinion of the court of civil appeals. Cullinan, a prominent Houston business and civic leader, and was created by a written instrument executed on Jby Cullinan, as grantor, and by W. As the case reaches this court, the principal question to be decided is whether the restrictions will expire automatically on June 30th. The court of civil appeals reversed that part of the trial court's judgment which declared that the restrictions would expire on June 30, 1969, and rendered judgment that they are of perpetual or indefinite duration expressly affirmed that part of the judgment declaring the restrictions to be valid and enforceable until Jand purported to reverse the trial court's judgment in another respect to be mentioned later in this opinion. The defendants filed a cross-appeal in which they complained of those portions of the judgment which declared the restrictions valid and enforceable until they expired. The plaintiffs appealed to the court of civil appeals where their principal complaint related to the trial court's declaration that the restrictions would expire. The judgment also declared that the restrictions were not otherwise invalid, unreasonable or unenforceable. The trial court rendered judgment on August 4, 1966, declaring that the restrictions would expire automatically on June 30, 1969. Petitioners, as defendants, sought a judgment declaring that the restrictions would terminate on June 30, 1969, and, alternatively, that they were invalid, ineffective and unenforceable. The respondents, as plaintiffs, sought a trial court judgment declaring that certain *553 building and use restrictions imposed by a written instrument on lots in "Shadyside", an exclusive residential subdivision of the City of Houston, were of permanent or indefinite duration, and, alternatively, for other relief, the nature of which is unimportant to our decision. Hutcheson, Taliaferro & Grundy, Thad Hutcheson, John D. ![]() Cleaves, Butler, Binion, Rice, Cook & Knapp, Jack Binion, William C.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |