From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Colony Park Ass'n v. Dugas

Michigan Court of Appeals
Jan 18, 1973
44 Mich. App. 467 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973)

Opinion

Docket No. 13430.

Decided January 18, 1973.

Appeal from St. Clair, Stanley C. Schlee, J. Submitted Division 2 December 12, 1972, at Lansing. (Docket No. 13430.) Decided January 18, 1973.

Complaint by Colony Park Association against Philip Dugas, Alice Dugas, Karl M. Doeren, and Ruth C. Doeren to enjoin the parking of motor homes in defendants' driveways. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Seely, Boyer, Gilleo Simon, for plaintiff.

Leonard J. Simasko, for defendants.

Before: FITZGERALD, P.J., and McGREGOR and TARGONSKI, JJ.

Former circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment pursuant to Const 1963, art 6, § 23 as amended in 1968.


Plaintiff brought suit to enjoin defendants from parking their motor homes in their driveways within the Colony Park Subdivision, charging that in doing so, defendants violated a recorded property restriction which provides:

"No tent, camping outfit or other temporary structure shall be erected, maintained or suffered to remain on said lots except such temporary structures as may be necessary for use in connection with the construction of such buildings and other structures as are permitted by this contract for such time and under such conditions as may be permitted in writing by said first parties."

After hearing arguments on the matter, the trial court ruled to deny plaintiff's request for injunctive relief. Examining the full text of the restriction, we note that it fails to specify motor homes for exclusion. The restriction was adopted in 1927. There is nothing to indicate that contemporary motor homes were within the contemplation of the drafters and it is significant to note that the restriction fails to prohibit automobile drawn trailer homes. Under the principles that restrictive covenants on the use of land are not favored and are to be strictly construed against parties seeking their enforcement, Eveleth v. Best, 322 Mich. 637, 642 (1948); Moore v. Kimball, 291 Mich. 455, 461 (1939), and where restrictions are ambiguous, uncertainties are resolved in favor of the free use of property, Bastendorf v. Arndt, 290 Mich. 423, 426 (1939), we rule to affirm the trial court.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Colony Park Ass'n v. Dugas

Michigan Court of Appeals
Jan 18, 1973
44 Mich. App. 467 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973)
Case details for

Colony Park Ass'n v. Dugas

Case Details

Full title:COLONY PARK ASSOCIATION v. DUGAS

Court:Michigan Court of Appeals

Date published: Jan 18, 1973

Citations

44 Mich. App. 467 (Mich. Ct. App. 1973)
205 N.W.2d 234

Citing Cases

Schuberg, Inc v. Kroger Co.

Even when express restrictive covenants exist, courts construe such provisions strictly against parties…

Hobwen, Inc. v. Sisbro Mgmt., L.L.C.

It was not unreasonable for defendant to argue that, to the extent it was ambiguous, the term should be…