## Facts

- Candlewood Lake Association, Inc. (Candlewood) was formed in 1972 as a property owners’ association for a residential development.
- The creation of the association included recorded deed restrictions applicable to lots in the development.
- The restrictions authorized Candlewood to impose charges and fees for items such as maintenance and common expenses, as well as water and sewage usage and related utility services.
- The restrictions stated that they “run with the land” and bind later owners who acquire title to lots in the development.
- The recorded restrictions also provided that each lot owner is deemed to have covenanted to pay charges imposed under the restrictions.
- In 1988, Kermit E. Scott acquired lots in the development through a conveyance from his father, who was a member of the association.
- Scott refused to pay Candlewood’s fees and charges assessed under the recorded restrictions.
- Candlewood sued Scott to collect unpaid assessments and charges.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Candlewood.
- Scott appealed to the Ohio Court of Appeals.

## Issues

1. Whether a successor lot owner who takes title to property subject to recorded deed restrictions is bound by covenant-based obligations to pay association assessments and utility-related charges, even if the owner did not personally sign the original restrictions.
2. Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment to the association enforcing those recorded restrictions.

## Decision

- The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment in favor of Candlewood.
- The court held that the recorded deed restrictions ran with the land and were binding on Scott as a subsequent owner.
- The court rejected Scott’s attempt to avoid liability based on the fact that he did not personally execute the original covenants, because the obligation arose from ownership of land burdened by recorded restrictions.
- The court concluded that summary judgment for Candlewood was proper because the material facts establishing the existence, recording, and binding effect of the restrictions were not genuinely disputed.

## Legal Principles

- A recorded covenant that by its terms runs with the land may bind later grantees who take title to the burdened property.
- A purchaser or successor owner is charged with notice of restrictions that are recorded in the chain of title and referenced in the conveyance as subject to matters of record.
- An association’s authority to impose assessments and service-related charges may be enforced against lot owners when that authority is created by recorded deed restrictions governing the subdivision.
- Summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence shows no genuine dispute of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

## Conclusion

*Candlewood Lake Association, Inc. v. Scott* upheld enforcement of recorded subdivision deed restrictions requiring payment of association assessments and utility-related charges, holding that the covenants ran with the land and bound a successor owner who took title subject to restrictions of record; the appellate court affirmed summary judgment for the association.


Candlewood Lake Association, Inc. v. Scott, 2001 WL 1654288 (2001)