Legal Opinion

Price v. Dryer

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided March 12, 1935No. 2399PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Bv BARNES, J.

It is our conclusion and determination that the defendant had such knowledge and information relative to the restriction as precluded her from saying that she did not have either actual or constructive knowledge of the terms, conditions and duration of the restrictive agreement. Reference was made thereto in the abstract of title, also in the deed of conveyance through which she acquired title. The restrictive agreement was a matter of record and while there may be some question as to its *696being eligible for record, yet the fact that it is referred to and carried into the…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Kokenge v. WhetstoneOhio Court of Appeals · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API