EYERMAN V. MERCANTILE TRUST CO. 524 S.W.2d 210 (Mo. App. 1975) CASE BRIEF

EYERMAN V. MERCANTILE TRUST CO.

524 S.W.2d 210 (Mo. App. 1975)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Eyerman (P) appealed the denial of an injunction to stop Trust's (D) demolition of a house wherein P alleged that it was a private nuisance, and to enforce restrictive covenants.

FACTS: Johnston died and her will directed that the home on the property in question be razed. P asserts that razing the home will adversely affect their property rights, violate the terms of the subdivision trust indenture for Kingsbury Place, produce an actionable private nuisance and is contrary to public policy. The trust indenture provides that Kingsbury Place and Kingsbury Terrace will be so maintained, improved, protected and managed as to be desirable for private residences. The trustees are empowered to protect and preserve 'Kingsbury Place' from encroachment, trespass, nuisance or injury. The intent of the general scheme was for improving and maintaining said property as desirable residence property of the highest class. These covenants were to run with the land and the indenture empowers lot owners or the trustees to bring suit to enforce them. The subdivision is occupied by handsome, spacious two and three-story homes, and all must be used exclusively as private residences. The indenture generally regulates location, costs and similar features for any structures in the subdivision, and limits construction of subsidiary structures except those that may beautify the property, for example, private stables, flower houses, conservatories, play houses or buildings of similar character. The current value of the house and land is $40,000.00; yet the estate could expect no more than $5,000.00 for the empty lot, less the cost of demolition at $4,350.00, making a grand loss of $39,350.00; the estate would gain $650 (for those of you who would have gone to med school instead of law school had you been good in math). Razing the home will depreciate adjoining property values by an estimated $10,000.00. The trial court denied P the injunction. P appealed.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner