Legal Opinion · Dissent

McHuron v. Grand Teton Lodge Co.

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided June 28, 1995No. 93-281Published

1DissentGolden, Chief Justice

I respectfully dissent. The majority approves the committee’s argument that its discretion is unlimited, its decision is final without articulated reason to a lot owner, and a lot owner is precluded from any legal recourse for an arbitrary decision. Aesthetic covenants are generally upheld, however, under a rule which offers dual protection to both parties. By resolving the reasonability issue as a question of law, the majority opinion fails to afford due process protection to a lot owner, a process other jurisdictions do find legally tenable.

Courts uphold aesthetic covenants as enforceable…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Rhue v. Cheyenne Homes, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1969
  2. La Vielle v. SeayCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1967
  3. SYRIAN ARCHDIOCESE OF NY v. Palisades Assoc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1970
  4. LeBlanc v. WebsterMissouri Court of Appeals · 1972
  5. Trieweiler v. SpicherMontana Supreme Court · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API