Brenizer v. . Stephens
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtSea well, J.
The plaintiffs have raised some fundamental questions as to the rights of certain defendants to enforce the restrictions in -the deeds, whether the covenants are personal, or run with the lands, and as to the separate consideration of the several subdivisions in Myers Park. The exigencies of decision do not require their discussion since there are defendants in the action whose legal and property interests are involved in the controversy and will be affected by the judgment rendered.
Applicable to the situation disclosed by the evidence, the general law is succinctly stated in 26 C. J. S.,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Trustees of Columbia College v. . ThacherNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Rombauer v. Compton Heights Christian ChurchSupreme Court of Missouri · 1931
- Cuneo v. Chicago Title & Trust Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1929
- Bickell v. MoraioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Continental Oil Co. v. FennemoreArizona Supreme Court · 1931
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Horace Case v. Arthur E. MorrisetteCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
- Higdon v. JaffaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- Sheets v. . DillonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Sheets v. DillonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Tull v. Doctors Building, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.