Capitol Farmers Mkt., Inc. v. Delongchamp
Decision Date | 28 August 2020 |
Docket Number | 1190103 |
Parties | CAPITOL FARMERS MARKET, INC. v. Cindy C. Warren DELONGCHAMP |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Gilbert C. Steindorff IV of Reynolds, Reynolds & Little, LLC, Birmingham; and Terry P. Wilson of Wilson & Jackson, LLC, Montgomery, for appellant.
Matthew T. Ellis of Crum, Ellis & Associates, P.C., Montgomery, for appellee.
Capitol Farmers Market, Inc. ("Capitol Farmers Market"), appeals from a judgment entered by the Montgomery Circuit Court ("the circuit court") in favor of Cindy C. Warren Delongchamp.
John Huddleston and Judith B. Huddleston owned certain real property located in Montgomery County, certain parcels of which they conveyed to other persons. In July 1982, the Huddlestons executed and recorded in the Montgomery Probate Court ("the probate court") a "Declaration of Restrictive Covenants" ("the 1982 Declaration"). The 1982 Declaration particularly described certain of the Huddlestons' property and specifically excepted from that description those portions of the property that had been conveyed to other persons before the 1982 Declaration.
In pertinent part, the 1982 Declaration provided the following regarding the Huddlestons' property:
In 2003, Delongchamp acquired two adjacent parcels of property ("the Delongchamp property"). The parties agree that the Delongchamp property is included within the property described by the 1982 Declaration and is, therefore, burdened by the restrictive covenants noted above. In 2015, Capitol Farmers Market acquired two parcels of property that are adjacent to one another. The parties agree that one of the parcels ("the Capitol Farmers Market property") is included within the property described by the 1982 Declaration. The Capitol Farmers Market property abuts the Delongchamp property. It is undisputed that the other parcel acquired by Capitol Farmers Market is not subject to the restrictive covenants set out in the 1982 Declaration.
Near the Delongchamp property and the Capitol Farmers Market property is certain property purchased by Southern Boulevard Corporation, which, the record indicates, is now known as Alfa Properties, Inc. ("Alfa"). It is undisputed that certain of the property owned by Alfa ("the Alfa property") is also burdened by the restrictive covenants set out in the 1982 Declaration.
In September 2017, Delongchamp filed a complaint in the circuit court that, as amended, sought a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief regarding the Capitol Farmers Market property. Delongchamp alleged that Capitol Farmers Market was planning to "subdivide the Capitol [Farmers Market p]roperty into a high density residential subdivision with proposed lots being substantially less than the required five (5) acre minimum." Delongchamp sought a judgment declaring that the Capitol Farmers Market property was encumbered by the restrictive covenants set out in the 1982 Declaration and that Capitol Farmers Market was required to abide by the restrictive covenants on the Capitol Farmers Market property. Delongchamp also sought an injunction restraining Capitol Farmers Market from "violating" the restrictive covenants set out in the 1982 Declaration "to include, but not limited to, subdividing the Capitol [Farmers Market] property into lots less than five (5) acres." Capitol Farmers Market answered Delongchamp's complaint and amended complaint and asserted a separate counterclaim; the counterclaim is not pertinent to this appeal.
The circuit court entered an order appointing a special master "to recommend a resolution of all issues." Capitol Farmers Market later moved for a summary judgment regarding the relief requested in Delongchamp's amended complaint. In January 2019, the special master conducted what he called "the final hearing." He stated: The parties presented arguments and evidence, including ore tenus testimony, to the special master at the hearing. In August 2019, the special master filed a report of his findings and his recommendation in the circuit court.
The circuit court thereafter entered an order, providing, in pertinent part:
The circuit court's order included lengthy analyses addressing the issues presented. Based on its analyses, the circuit court's order concluded, in relevant part:
Capitol Farmers Market thereafter filed a motion, asserting that the circuit court had improperly entered its order without affording Capitol Farmers Market sufficient time and a hearing to object to the special master's recommendation, as contemplated by Rule 53(e)(2), Ala. R. Civ. P. The circuit court granted Capitol Farmers Market's motion and set the matter for a hearing. Capitol Farmers Market...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Darby v. Presley
...can be raised for the first time on appeal by the parties or by the appellate court ex mero motu.’ " Capitol Farmers Market, Inc. v. Delongchamp, 320 So.3d 574, 579 (Ala. 2020) (quoting J.C. Jacobs Banking Co. v. Campbell, 406 So. 2d 834, 850 (Ala. 1981) ).With respect to the application of......
-
Capitol Farmers Mkt. v. Ingram
... Capitol Farmers Market, Inc. v. Angie Ingram and Russell Ingram No. 1200688 Supreme Court of Alabama December 3, 2021 ... Appeal ... from Montgomery ... the Ingrams. This case has previously been before this Court ... See Capitol Farmers Market, Inc. v ... Delongchamp , 320 So.3d 574 (Ala. 2020). [ 1 ] ... Facts ... and Procedural History ... The ... following was set ... ...
-
Byrne v. Fisk
... ... 2000)(quoting E.R. Squibb &Sons, Inc. v. Cox , ... 477 So.2d 963, 969 (Ala. 1985), quoting ... So.3d 546, 558 (Ala. 2008)." Capitol Farmers Mkt., ... Inc. v. Delongchamp, ... 320 ... ...
-
Cole v. Davis
...In support of his contention, Cole relies on this Court's prior decisions in Withington v. Cloud, 522 So.2d 263 (Ala. 1988), and Delongchamp, supra. and foremost, as explained previously in this opinion, the Kirkwood Heights covenants clearly provide the parameters for lot size and width in......