Wesley M. Breland Realtor, Inc. v. Amanatidis
| Docket Number: | 2007-CA-01129-COA Linked Case(s): 2007-CA-01129-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-02-2008 Opinion Author: CARLTON, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Real property - Restrictive covenants - Equitable estoppel Judge(s) Concurring: King,, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-25-2007 Appealed from: Lamar County Chancery Court Judge: Eugene "Gene" Fair Disposition: BRELAND WAS PERMANENTLY ENJOINED FROM DEVELOPING HIS "RESERVED" LOT AS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY Case Number: 2006-0333-GN-F |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | WESLEY M. BRELAND, REALTOR, INC. |
WILLIAM E. ANDREWS,
CANDANCE L. RICKMAN |
||
| Appellee: | NICK AMANATIDIS AND CHERRY AMANATIDIS | CHARLES EDWARD GREER |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Real property - Restrictive covenants - Equitable estoppel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Wesley M. Breland, Realtor, Inc. was permanently enjoined by the Lamar County Chancery Court from developing a parcel of land he owned in the Serene Hills subdivision for any purpose other than residential use. Breland appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Breland argues that the chancellor erred because even though the “reserved” lot’s purpose was not specified according to regulation, in designating the lot “reserved,” the public was put on notice that it was not solely for residential use; the restrictive covenants of Serene Hills clearly indicated that only lots 1-71 would be restricted to residential development; and the subdivision regulation requiring that a plat include the purpose of reserved parcels was not applicable because the Lamar County Board of Supervisors approved the plat. The chancellor determined the Amanatidises, when deciding whether to purchase their home, were entitled to rely on the subdivision plat; the restrictive covenants filed by Red Oak, of which Breland was an original founder and developer; and the terms of the subdivision regulations, “which give guidance to interpretation of the plat and the restrictions affecting property. . . .” The chancellor found that before deciding to purchase his new home, Nick, in fact, did rely on a firsthand examination of the Serene Hills subdivision, the plat, and the Serene Hills restrictive covenants. Through none of these examinations could the Amanatidises have reasonably anticipated that the empty “reserved” lot next to their lot would soon be developed into commercial property. To now allow Breland to develop his property so that he can house a real estate office and storage for construction supplies would be substantially unfair under the circumstances. The chancellor’s judgment for the Amanatidises on the basis of equitable estoppel was founded on substantial evidence and correctly applied legal standards. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
