My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10121964 Regular Meeting
San-Marcos
>
City Clerk
>
01 City Council Minutes
>
1960 s
>
1964
>
10121964 Regular Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/6/2008 1:16:07 PM
Creation date
6/23/2008 11:08:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
City Clerk - Document
Minutes
City Clerk - Type
Regular Meeting
Date
10/12/1964
Volume Book
29
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />CLA.RK, THOMAS, !lARRrS, DENIUS & WINTERS <br /> <br />'I <br />V-- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />IVIr. B. R. Fuller <br /> <br />0> <br />-..J- <br /> <br />October 21, 1964 <br /> <br />"of the addition as would attend 'shops', and <br />the other commercial pursuits plainly mentioned <br />in Restriction 6. The maxims ejusdem generis <br />and nosciturasociis are gUides to the ascer- <br />tainment of the parties' intention; they must <br />be applied, or not, with due regard for the <br />defect of the entire instrument and not with <br />reg31:d to Restriction 6 alone." <br /> <br />The Court "lent on to hold that the two restrictions together <br />ought to be enough to take the multiple dwellings planned b~ <br />the apartment builder out of the residential class and put <br />them in-bo the same class with shops and other commercial <br />uses. In addition, the Court stated, in an unusually ambiva- <br />lent manner -' I1ha ving gotten this fal~ J it Is proper to refer <br />to the fact that Defendant Green Avenue Apartments' business <br />will be the rental of these sixty-two apartments to the <br />public that this is to be done for profit, and that [rOln <br />said t3 Gtandpoint~ the undertaking would be of <br />as ~uch a commercial chDractcr as would be the operation of <br />D r store T . It <br /> <br />As you can see, this is not a strong case as far as our <br />facts are concerned, but it is case most nearly in point <br />that I have been able to find. Additionally, I would point <br />out that the people to raise an objection to the building of <br />apartwents would be people either in of contract <br />with the original Grantor; that is) people who bought <br />tracts of land from a man who included these deed restrictions <br />in all tI12 deeds; 010 people who have some other interest in <br />seeing -'chat the restric.tions are carried out) such as <br />adjoining property owners. <br /> <br />It "TOuld be my opinion that the language in the deed restric- <br />tions in our case could probably be distinguished from the <br />in this case, and as such, the builder could put up <br />he desired to erect so long as it conformed to the <br />square feet per UGit restriction) without doing so in <br />complete disregard of the covenant restrictions and the case <br />laH. <br /> <br /> <br />Very truly yours, <br />. /.~~' <br />, (/; <br />""J&'--<A--C. ,--u-z!' -a/ <br /> <br />rrc:cq <br /> <br />IrOm Curtis <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.