Foster v. Orchard Development Co., LLC
227 W. Va. 119
| W. Va. | 2010Background
- Foster sought injunctive relief and damages regarding The Gallery subdivision's covenants and Design Guidelines governing minimum housing sizes.
- The Gallery was developed by Orchard, which retained control of the Association and Review Committee during development.
- Design Guidelines, though not recorded, set minimum square footage and were subject to amendment by the Association's Executive Board.
- Peteler purchased seven lots and planned 100 studio townhomes, initially approved at 800 square feet, triggering Foster's challenge.
- Circuit court held Covenants and Design Guidelines separate, allowed unilateral Design Guideline amendments, and granted summary judgment for Orchard and Peteler, denying injunctive relief.
- Appellant preserved appeal from denial of injunctive relief and summary judgment; West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals reviews de novo and for abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Covenants and Design Guidelines are separate documents | Foster: they function as a single scheme; Design Guidelines constrain Covenants. | Orchard and Peteler: separate documents; Design Guidelines flexible and amendable independently. | Yes; they are separate documents. |
| Whether the Design Guidelines could be unilaterally amended by the Association | Amendments to Design Guidelines were improper if binding covenants. | Amendments follow Design Guidelines procedures; unilateral changes allowed. | Design Guidelines properly amended per their own procedures. |
| Whether the circuit court erred in denying injunctive relief based on the amendment and separation ruling | Injunction should issue to prevent nonconforming townhomes. | Amendments approved; no irreparable harm shown; discretion to deny relief proper. | Court did not abuse discretion; injunction denial affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Armstrong v. Stribling, 192 W. Va. 280 (1994) (unrecorded design guidance can affect enforceability of covenants when intended)
- Wallace v. St. Clair, 147 W. Va. 377 (1962) (intention governs construction of covenants and restrictions)
- Stuart v. Lake Washington Realty, 141 W.Va. 627 (1956) (injunctions discretionary, abuse shown by clear error)
- Allemong v. Frendzel, 178 W.Va. 601 (1987) (intent of the instrument governs; surrounding circumstances considered)
- Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Federal Ins. Co. Of New York, 148 W.Va. 160 (1963) (summary judgment standard: no genuine issue of material fact)