Walker v. Haslett
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. W. M. Conley, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtFinlayson, P. J.
This is an action to enjoin the violation of a certain covenant or restriction in a deed to defendant Mary M. Haslett, whereby she covenanted that, until January 1, 1925, the premises granted to her shall be used for residence purposes only, that “no building or structure whatever, other than a first-class private residence of at least two full stories in height, with customary outbuildings, including a private garage, shall be erected, placed or permitted on said premises or any part thereof,” and that “any such residence shall cost and be fairly worth not less than five thousand dollars.”…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Schadt v. BrillMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Firth v. MarovichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Harris v. RorabackMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
- Misch v. LehmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1913
- Hartman v. WellsIllinois Supreme Court · 1912
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Nahrstedt v. Lakeside Village Condominium Assn.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Wing v. Forest Lawn Cemetery Assn.California Supreme Court · 1940
- Fairchild v. RainesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Morgan v. VeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Continental Oil Co. v. FennemoreArizona Supreme Court · 1931
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.