Facts
- A residential subdivision was subject to recorded restrictive covenants enforced by a homeowners association.
- The covenants required certain vehicles (including “trucks of any nature” parked overnight) to be kept in an enclosed garage.
- Charles D. Jones owned a commercial tow truck and regularly parked it in the open on his driveway rather than garaging it.
- The homeowners association sought an injunction to stop Charles and Glenda M. Jones from keeping or storing the tow truck on their lot.
- The Joneses argued the association could not enforce the restriction because it had not acted against two other owners who occasionally kept utility-company pickup trucks on their lots.
Issues
- Whether limited prior nonenforcement against other owners constituted waiver or abandonment of the association’s right to enforce the vehicle-parking covenant.
- Whether the association was entitled to injunctive relief barring Charles Jones from parking the tow truck on his lot in violation of the covenant.
- Whether injunctive relief could properly be entered against Glenda Jones absent proof that she violated the covenants.
- Whether either party was entitled to attorney’s fees.
Decision
- The court denied the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of a hearing transcript because the record and the trial court’s written opinion sufficiently set out the factual findings relied upon.
- The court held the association did not waive its right to enforce the covenant through limited, sporadic prior nonenforcement against two other owners.
- The court reversed the refusal to enjoin Charles Jones and remanded for entry of a decree enjoining him from parking the tow truck on his property in violation of the covenant.
- The court affirmed the denial of injunctive relief against Glenda Jones because there was no evidence she personally violated any restrictive covenant.
- The court affirmed the denial of attorney’s fees to both sides.
Legal Principles
- A restrictive covenant remains enforceable unless nonenforcement is so substantial and general that it shows an intent to relinquish the covenant or materially destroys its value.
- Sporadic or limited nonenforcement against a small number of violations, without a substantial effect on the covenant’s value or purpose, does not constitute waiver or abandonment and does not bar future enforcement.
- Injunctive relief to enforce restrictive covenants is appropriate where a valid covenant applies and an ongoing violation is shown.
- Injunctive relief against an individual requires an evidentiary basis that the individual violated (or is responsible for violating) the covenant.
- A trial court may deny attorney’s fees where the results are mixed and the equities do not justify shifting fees.
Conclusion
The court enforced the subdivision’s vehicle-parking restriction by ordering an injunction against Charles Jones’s ongoing tow-truck violation, holding that limited prior nonenforcement against a few other owners did not waive the association’s enforcement rights; it otherwise affirmed the denial of relief against Glenda Jones and the denial of attorney’s fees.