Keene v. Reed
| Citation | 340 S.W.2d 859 |
| Decision Date | 17 November 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 3790,3790 |
| Parties | Edward L. KEENE et al., Appellants, v. Herbert L. REED et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas |
Eugene Chambers, Houston, for appellant.
Dawson & Hatten, Dyche, Wheat & Thornton, Houston, for appellee.
Appellants, as owners of lots in an addition, use of which was restricted by contract to single family dwellings, sought an injunction restraining the operation of beauty parlors by appellees.
The court found under undisputed evidence that appellees have operated their beauty parlors continuously since April, 1953; that appellees Reed had remodeled their home for use as a beauty shop over six years previous to the filing of suit at a cost of $2,000, and had purchased $1,500 worth of equipment therefor; that the violations of restrictions by appellees had been open and obvious during the entire period. The findings of fact are not challenged. He concluded the action was barred by the four-year statute of limitation, Art. 5529, Vernon's Ann.Civ.Stats.; that appellants were guilty of laches, and had waived their rights to object to the violations. Judgment was rendered that appellants take nothing. Appellants' points are directed against the conclusions.
As to the limitation question, appellants say the restrictive covenant running with the land is an incorporeal hereditament, as such is a negative easement and an interest in land, and is governed by the ten year statute, Art. 5510, as an action 'for the recovery of lands, tenements or hereditaments.' They rely on construction of a similar Missouri statute (V.A.M.S. Sec. 516.010) in McLaughlin v. Neiger, St. Louis Court of Appeals 1956, 286 S.W.2d 380, 383, in support of the position.
In Arrington v. Cleveland, Tex.Civ.App., 242 S.W.2d 400, 401, writ refused, Justice Culver characterized the present action as 'the asserted violation of rights and duties growing out of the written contract', quoting the provisions of Art. 5529, and citing cases holding actions to prevent encroachment on, or prevent obstruction of private easements were barred in four years. The Fort Worth Court held limitation could not there be invoked because the evidence did not show a beauty shop had been operated on the premises continuously for a period of four years.
In the present case, the undisputed evidence supporting the findings shows operation of a beauty shop by one defendant for six years, and by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dempsey v. Apache Shores Property Owners Ass'n, Inc.
...party which results in injury to the defendant. Culver v. Pickens, 142 Tex. 87, 176 S.W.2d 167, 170-71 (1943); Keene v. Reed, 340 S.W.2d 859 (Tex.Civ.App.1960, writ ref'd). The burden of proof to establish the defense of laches is on the defendant. Lee v. Powers, 446 S.W.2d 938, 939 (Tex.Ci......
-
El Paso Development Co. v. Berryman
...resisting the issuance of an injunction has so changed that it cannot be restored to its former state. Cf. Keene v. Reed, 340 S.W.2d 859 (Tex.Civ.App.--Waco 1960, writ ref'd). Although only 667 acres remains to secure the note, there is undisputed testimony that it is worth much more than t......
-
Brewer v. Nationsbank of Texas
...another are essential elements of laches. In the Interest of Moragas, 972 S.W.2d 86, 92 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 1998, no writ); Keene v. Reed, 340 S.W.2d 859, 860 (Tex. Civ. App.--Waco 1960, no writ). Laches is usually available only in suits strictly in equity or in actions at law that invol......
-
Park v. Baxter
...597 (Tex.Civ.App.-Amarillo 1970, no writ history); City of Fort Worth v. Johnson, 388 S.W.2d 400 (Tex.1964); Keene v. Reed, 340 S.W.2d 859 (Tex.Civ.App.-Waco 1960, writ ref'd); Arrington v. Cleveland, 242 S.W.2d 400 (Tex.Civ.App.-Fort Worth 1951, writ The undisputed evidence shows that the ......
-
Chapter 8-1 Temporary Injunction
...2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 1408, at *9-10 (App.— Dallas Feb. 17, 2017); Culver v. Pickens, 176 S.W.2d 167 (Tex. 1943).[25] See Keene v. Reed, 340 S.W.2d 859, 860 (Tex. Civ. App.—Waco 1960, writ ref'd).[26] Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 65.023(a).[27] Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 24.008.[28] In re ......