Legal Opinion

Day v. Santorsola

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided July 28, 2003No. 50462-2-IPublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchindler, J.

Russell and RuthAnne Day purchased a lot in the Burton Estates subdivision. The subdivision has restrictive covenants which require a committee (Committee) to consent to construction of a house. The Committee rejected proposed plans for the Days’ house. The Days sued the Committee and all the property owners, alleging that the Committee’s rejection of their plans was not permitted under the covenants and that the Committee acted unrea*749sonably and in bad faith. The trial court concluded that the intent of the covenants was to regulate the height of houses, not to protect view, and that the…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Mahler v. SzucsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Mahler v. SzucsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Hollis v. Garwall, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Robel v. Roundup Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Riss v. AngelWashington Supreme Court · 1997

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Wilkinson v. Chiwawa Communities Ass'nWashington Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Green v. Normandy ParkCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  3. Green v. Normandy Park Riviera Section Community Club, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  4. Bauman v. TurpenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  5. Bauman v. TurpenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007

9 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