Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Runyon v. Paley

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided June 18, 1991No. 902SC757Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Judge GREENE

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

The three elements required for a covenant to run at law are that: (1) the original covenanting parties intended the benefits and the burdens of the covenant to pass to the successors in interest of the original covenanting parties; (2) the act covenanted to be done or omitted, touches and concerns the land or estate conveyed; and (3) there is privity of estate between the owner of the burdened property and the party seeking to enforce the covenant. See Raintree Corp. v. Rowe, 38 N.C. App. 664, 669-70, 248 S.E.2d 904, 908 (1978); see also…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Orange & Rockland Utilities, Inc. v. Philwold Estates, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. Raintree Corp. v. RoweCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
  3. Sheets v. . DillonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  4. Sheets v. DillonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. Stegall v. Housing Authority of the City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API