Legal Opinion

Adams v. Lindberg

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided March 3, 1980No. 2 CA-CIV 3421PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RICHMOND, Judge.

Appellants contend that a covenant prohibiting offensive activities in a residential subdivision in the Tucson foothills is too vague to support a judgment enjoining the construction and use of overhead lights on a tennis court. They also challenge the sufficiency of the evidence and the propriety of the trial judge’s view of the premises, and contend appellees had waived their right to enforce the restrictions. We affirm the judgment.

The covenant on which the trial court relied is contained in the recorded Declara tion of Building and Use Restrictions for Casas Adobes…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Riley v. StovesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1974
  2. Carter v. ConroyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
  3. First National Bank v. Clifton Armory Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Tucson-North Town Home Apartments Homeowners' Ass'n v. RobbCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1979

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Burke v. Voicestream Wireless Corp. IICourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2004
  2. Tarpley v. HornyakCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2004
  3. Redington Ranch Associates v. RedmanCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API