Legal Opinion
Mays v. Burgess
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided October 31, 1945No. 9119PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GRONER, G J.
This is a second appeal in this case. When it was here before we affirmed, with costs, and by our mandate ordered the District Court to carry its judgment into effect.
The case concerned the validity of a “restrictive covenant” running with the land. The District Court on the original trial held the covenant in full force and effect and directed defendant Mays, whose purchase violated the covenant, to remove herself and all of her personal effects from the premises within sixty days from the date of judgment (June 30, 1944).
On the original appeal here it was argued that the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- In Re Sanford Fork & Tool Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Ex Parte Sibbald v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- In Re PottsSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Gaines v. RuggSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Guardian Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1930
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hurd v. HodgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Consarc Corporation and Consarc Engineering, Ltd. v. United States Treasury Department, Office of Foreign Assets ControlCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995
- Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. v. Village of Arlington HeightsDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1979
- Pollei v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1990
- Hurd v. HodgeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1947
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.