Legal Opinion
Biagini v. Hyde
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 27, 1970No. Civ. 26108PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CHRISTIAN, J.
Kenneth and Myrtle Hyde appeal from a judgment enjoining Mrs. Hyde’s part-time operation of a beauty parlor in her home as a violation of a restrictive covenant upon their property.
Before appellants purchased the tract home in question, the developers of the subdivision had recorded a declaration of restrictions upon all the property in the subdivision. The restriction at issue in this appeal reads: “A-l. Land Use and Building Type. No lot shall be used except for residential purposes. No building shall be erected, altered, placed, or permitted to remain on any lot other…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wing v. Forest Lawn Cemetery Assn.California Supreme Court · 1940
- Frost v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Morgan v. VeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Smith v. NorthCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Swineford v. NicholsTuscarawas County Court of Common Pleas · 1961
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Welsch v. GoswickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Ezer v. FuchslochCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Protect Our Neighborhoods v. City of Palm SpringsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2022
- Welsch v. GoswickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982