Sec. 1286. Covenants Imposing Burden Upon Grantee
Description
This section is from the book "The Law Of Contracts", by William Herbert Page. Also available from Amazon: Commercial Contracts: A Practical Guide to Deals, Contracts, Agreements and Promises.
Sec. 1286. Covenants Imposing Burden Upon Grantee
At Common Law covenants for the benefit of the realty could run with the land. Covenants imposing burdens thereon could not run with the land unless they created some recognized legal estate or interest.1 In equity, however, a greater latitude ha? been indulged in by the courts in enforcing covenants which while not technically running with the land, are nevertheless intended to limit the use and enjoyment thereof. A covenant by a grantee to fence,2 or by a grantor to fence,3 or a contract between adjoining lot owners to construct a party wall,4 and covenants which restrict the use of the realty conveyed as to use it for certain purposes only5 are each enforceable against any grantee with notice, either actual or constructive, into whose hands the realty may come.
14 Le Roy v. Beard, 8 How. (U. S.) 451; Ladd v. Noyes, 137 Mass. 151; Real v. Hollister, 20 Neb. 112; 29 N. W. 189; Browne v. Walcott, 1 N. D. 497; 48 N. W. 426.
15 Bolinger v. Brake, 57 Kan. 663; 47 Pac. 537.
16 McPike v. Heaton, 131 Cal. 109; 82 Am. St. Rep. 335; 63 Pac. 179; Woodward v. Brown, 119 Cal. 283; 63 Am. St. Rep. 108; 51 Pac. 2, 542; Lawrence v. Montgomery, 37 Cal. 183; Mitchell v. Warner, 5 Conn. 497; Smith v. Richards, 155 Mass. 79; 28 N. E. 1132; Davenport v. Davenport, 52 Mich. 587; 18 N. W. 371; Chapman v. Kimball, 7 Neb. 399; Sears v. Broady, - Neb. -; 92 N. W. 214; Water's Estate v. Bagley (Neb.), 92 N. W. 637; Moore v. Merrill, 17 N. H. 75; 43 Am. Dec. 593; Kenney v. Norton, 10 Heisk. (Tenn.) 380; Swasey v. Brooks, 30 Vt. 692; Marbnry v.
Thornton, 82 Vt. 702; 1 S. E. 909.
17 Kingdon v. Nottle, 1 M. & S. 355; 4 M. & S. 53.
18 Hazle v. Bondy, 173 I11. 302; 50 N. E. 671; Scott v. Stetter, 128 Ind. 385; 27 N. E. 721; Boon v. McHenry, 55 la. 202; 7 N. W. 503; Security Bank v. Holmes, 68 Minn. 538; 71 N. W. 699; s. c, 65 Minn. 531; 68 N. W. 113; Geiszler v. De Graaf, 166 N. Y. 339; 82 Am. St. Rep. 659; 59 N. E. 993; Foote v. Burnet, 10 Ohio 317; 36 Am. Dec. 90; Lescaleet v. Rickner, 16 Ohio C. C. 461.
1 Keppel v. Baily, 2 Myl. & K. 517.
2 Hickey v. Ry., 51 O. S. 40; 46 Am. St. Rep. 545; 23 L. R. A. 396; 36 N. E. 672.
3 Easter v. R. R., 14 O. S. 48.
4 Adams v. Noble, 120 Mich. 545; sub nomine, Noble v. Kendall, 79 N. W. 810.
Continue to:
My Books
