Facts
-
Eastern Washington Bible Camp, Inc. (Camp) owned land on Silver Lake in Spokane County and subdivided part of it into lots.
-
The Camp’s subdivision plan included deed/contract restrictions intended to keep ownership and occupancy within persons who subscribed to the tenets of the Assembly of God Church.
-
In 1968, George Riste’s parents purchased two subdivision lots from the Camp under a real-estate contract.
-
After the purchase price was fully paid, Riste’s surviving parent asked the Camp to issue the deed in George Riste’s name, and Riste acquired title to one lot through that deed.
-
In 1974, the Camp delivered a deed to Riste containing restrictions on occupancy and resale, including:
- a clause requiring the Camp’s consent before the lot could be sold to another; and
- a religion-based limitation tied to the beliefs of the Assembly of God Church (affecting who could occupy and/or take by transfer).
-
Riste later contracted to sell the lot to a buyer who did not subscribe to the Camp’s faith.
-
The Camp refused to allow the sale and refused to remove the restrictions from the deed.
-
Riste sued seeking a declaratory judgment that the restrictions were invalid and seeking reformation of the deed to delete them.
-
The superior court granted summary judgment for Riste, ruled the restrictions void, and reformed the deed; the Camp appealed.
Issues
- Whether a deed conveying a fee simple may validly bar resale unless the original grantor consents (a grantor-approval clause), or whether such a clause is void as a direct restraint on alienation.
- Whether a deed restriction limiting use, occupancy, or transfer based on religious creed is void under RCW 49.60.224.
- Whether the Camp could enforce the restrictions through equitable doctrines (such as estoppel) despite the restrictions being contrary to statute or public policy.
- Whether reformation and declaratory relief were proper remedies to remove the void restrictions while leaving the conveyance in place.
Decision
- The Court of Appeals of Washington affirmed the summary judgment for Riste.
- The grantor-approval resale clause was void because it operated as a direct (disabling) restraint on alienation of a fee simple estate and was repugnant to the nature of a fee.
- The religion-based restriction was void under RCW 49.60.224 because it restricted real-property rights on the basis of “creed.”
- The court rejected enforcement through equitable doctrines where the challenged provisions were void as a matter of statute and public policy.
- Reformation deleting the void provisions was an appropriate remedy, leaving Riste with title not burdened by the unlawful restrictions.
Legal Principles
- A provision in a deed conveying a fee simple that forbids transfer without the grantor’s consent is an invalid disabling restraint on alienation and is void as repugnant to a fee simple.
- RCW 49.60.224 renders void and unenforceable any real-property provision that restricts conveyance, use, or occupancy based on creed (religious belief).
- Even if similar restrictions were contemplated in an earlier purchase arrangement, a deed delivered after enactment of RCW 49.60.224 is subject to the statute and cannot enforce creed-based limitations.
- Equitable doctrines cannot be used to give effect to deed restrictions that are void under statute or public policy.
- When a deed contains unlawful restrictions, a court may reform the instrument to strike the void terms while preserving the valid conveyance.
Conclusion
Riste v. Eastern Washington Bible Camp, Inc. held that a fee simple deed cannot be burdened with a grantor’s continuing power to veto future sales, and that restrictions tied to religious creed in a real-property instrument are void under RCW 49.60.224; accordingly, the Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the grantee and approved reformation of the deed to remove the invalid provisions.