Anderson v. Riegel

Appellants make the following assignments of error.(1) The court erred in its conclusion of law that the restrictive covenant in the trustees’ deeds to Harry D. Baker and Hugh P. Baker of lots 9 and 10, requiring notice of the proposed sale of property and giving the heirs of J. S. Baker, deceased, the option to purchase the same, is valid:(a) Because said restrictive covenant is repugnant to the grant of the fee-simple title to said lots as contained in said deeds;(b) Because the said restrictive covenant is invalid for the reason that the trustees had no authority to impose such restriction…