Court Opinion

ID: 9670788
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:26:18.352523+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:06.534931
License: Public Domain

Wright, Judge, concurring.
I concur in the majority’s conclusion that the attempted amendment to the covenant in August 1990 was invalid. As the majority points out, in January 1990,2 years after the principal 5-year period for the 1983 agreement had expired, the agreement was rewritten to provide that the covenants would run with the land and continue until January 1, 1995. The August 1990 attempt to amend the covenant during the principal term was invalid.
I also believe the attempt to amend the covenant was invalid for another reason. When the Boyleses purchased the property, there was no existing setback of 120 feet from Pioneer Hills Road. Landowners in a subdivision may not, by a majority vote, create new covenants which restrict the use of the land held by a minority of the landowners. In my opinion, any attempt to place greater restrictions on the use of the land by amendment of existing covenants would require the vote of all landowners in the subdivision. It is for this additional reason that I believe the attempt by the majority of the landowners to amend the covenant was void.