Dunlavy v. Davis, Unpublished Decision (2-6-1998)

Whether a restrictive covenant prohibits an intended use of land depends on the language of the covenant and the intention of parties in using such language. Kern v. Murph (1936), 4 Ohio Supp. 356, 6 O.O. 223. The intentions of the parties are ascertained by considering the covenant within the context of the entire document, the circumstances surrounding the drafting of the covenant, and the subject matter of the covenant. Slife v. Kundtz (1974), 40 Ohio App.2d 179, 69 O.O.2d 178, 318 N.E.2d 557; Hi-LoOil Co., Inc. v. McCollum (1987), 38 Ohio App.3d 12,526 N.E.2d 90. Thus, although courts are…