Legal Opinion

Bruni v. Thacker

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 2, 1993No. 16-91-05192; CA A72804PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeits, P. J.

Plaintiffs brought this action to enforce restrictive covenants and to enjoin defendants from violating these covenants by operating a bed and breakfast business in their residence, which is located in the same subdivision as plaintiffs’ residences. Defendants appeal from a summary judgment for plaintiffs. We affirm.

The two principal covenants that plaintiffs argue are violated by the bed and breakfast operation and that are relevant to the issues we discuss, provide in part:

‘ ‘ Only one single family residence, together with appurtenant outbuildings, shall be constructed on a lot.

<<$ # * # *

“…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lowden v. BosleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  2. Robins v. WalterDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  3. Yogman v. ParrottCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API