## Facts

- Sharpstown Civic Association and subdivision homeowners sought to enforce residential-use deed restrictions against the owners of Lots One and Two, Block 42, in a Houston residential subdivision.
- The two lots formed a triangular tract bordering a residential street (Triolo Lane) and a larger city street (South Gessner Road), plus adjacent drainage and utility easements.
- The deed restrictions limited the lots to residential purposes.
- A prior owner placed a small one-story wooden building on Lot One, improved the site with utilities and a gravel driveway, and used the building as a real-estate office with other small professional tenants; no suit was filed during that period.
- The current owner continued office use briefly, then announced plans for a commercial car wash; evidence also indicated consideration of a strip shopping center and contemporaneous use of Lot One as a used car lot.
- The jury found: (1) Lot One had been used for non-residential purposes continuously since about 1970; (2) Lot Two had not; (3) the lots were used and maintained as one parcel; (4) plaintiffs knew or should have known of the non-residential use of Lot One; and (5) the association waived enforcement as to Lot One.
- The trial court denied a permanent injunction based on the verdict, and the court of appeals affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether prior acquiescence in a relatively minor non-residential use on Lot One barred enforcement of residential-use deed restrictions against a later, substantially more intensive commercial use.
2. Whether any waiver relating to Lot One extended to Lot Two and to different categories of commercial development (e.g., car wash or strip shopping center).
3. Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to a permanent injunction enforcing the residential deed restrictions.

## Decision

- The Texas Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and the trial court and rendered judgment granting a permanent injunction.
- The Court held that any waiver or acquiescence arising from the earlier small office use was limited and did not preclude enforcement against a substantially different and more intensive commercial use.
- The Court further held that any waiver did not extend to Lot Two and could not be used to authorize broader commercial development of both lots.
- The Court enjoined non-residential commercial use inconsistent with the residential deed restrictions.

## Legal Principles

- Non-enforcement in the face of a minor or insubstantial violation does not necessarily constitute abandonment or a blanket waiver of a residential-use restriction.
- Waiver is construed narrowly and is tied to the character and degree of the tolerated violation; it does not automatically authorize a substantially different or more intrusive violation.
- Waiver analysis may be lot-specific; a waiver as to one lot does not automatically extend to other lots subject to the same restrictions.
- Injunctive relief is an appropriate remedy to enforce deed restrictions when a violation is shown and defenses such as broad waiver, abandonment, or other complete bars do not apply.

## Conclusion

The Texas Supreme Court held that tolerance of a small office use on one lot did not surrender the right to enforce residential deed restrictions against later, materially different commercial development, and it granted a permanent injunction preventing the proposed commercial use of the lots.


Sharpstown Civic Ass’n, Inc. v. Pickett, 679 S.W.2d 956 (Tex. 1984)