Stephens Co. v. Lisk

This is the question for decision here: Did the trial court err in concluding as a matter of law that, upon the stipulated facts, the property of feme defendant, described in the complaint, is chargeable for its proportionate share of the cost of improving Maryland Avenue as set forth in the judgment from which appeal is taken ?

This is a question of law determinable by proper interpretation of the wording of the covenant as written in the deeds under which feme defendant acquired title to the lots constituting the property described in the complaint.

A covenant, as stated by Battle, J., in…