Knight v. City of Albuquerque

Citation794 P.2d 739,1990 NMCA 67,110 N.M. 265
Decision Date14 June 1990
Docket NumberNo. 12141,12141
PartiesJames E. KNIGHT and Oleta Knight, his wife, et al., Petitioners-Appellees, v. The CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, Double Eagle Country Club, et al., Respondents-Appellees, Concept Development Group, Inc., Intervenor-Appellant.
CourtCourt of Appeals of New Mexico
OPINION

BIVINS, Chief Judge.

Plaintiffs are owners of real property situated in a subdivision named Paradise Hills Country Club Estates. They filed suit against a number of defendants in an attempt to prevent development of any property denominated, on the subdivision plats, as part of the golf course. The trial court granted summary judgment to plaintiffs and issued a declaratory judgment delineating the boundaries of the golf course and limiting the use of that property to use as a golf course, as a park, or for similar open space purposes. Intervenor Concept Development Group, Inc. (Concept) filed an appeal from the judgment.

The relevant undisputed facts are as follows: (1) the original developers of Paradise Hills used the golf course as a selling tool and in the plat of the subdivision denominated the territory it would occupy; and (2) plaintiffs relied on the continued existence of the golf course in purchasing their properties from the developer. Under New Mexico law, these facts give rise to a private right of action on the part of the property owners to prevent the golf course from being utilized for other purposes. See Ute Park Summer Homes Ass'n v. Maxwell Land Grant Co., 77 N.M. 730, 427 P.2d 249 (1967); Cree Meadows, Inc. v. Palmer, 68 N.M. 479, 362 P.2d 1007 (1961). The foregoing cases establish that a developer will not be allowed to induce purchasers to buy property by purporting to include open space such as parks or golf courses in a subdivision plat, only to subsequently change the uses of those open space areas.

Concept argues this case is distinguishable from Ute Park and Cree Meadows because in this case the developer specifically reserved the right to build hotels, cottages, or other facilities on any tract shown on the Paradise Hills Country Club Estates plat without the permission of the owners of any lot located within the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Twin Forks Ranch, Inc. v. Brooks
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • 10 Octubre 1995
    ...See Bassett v. Bassett, 110 N.M. 559, 566, 798 P.2d 160, 167 (1990) (constructive trust discussed); Knight v. City of Albuquerque, 110 N.M. 265, 266, 794 P.2d 739, 740 (Ct.App.1990) (subdivision property owners had private right of action in equity against developer who induced owners to pu......
  • Chesus v. Watts, WD
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 3 Marzo 1998
    ...or which is unconscionable to the property owners. Id. The rationale behind this comment is gleaned from Knight v. City of Albuquerque, 110 N.M. 265, 794 P.2d 739 (App.1990), where the developer, who had reserved the right to make changes from the plat, sought to change open spaces into a h......
  • City of Rio Rancho v. Amrep Sw. Inc.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court
    • 22 Agosto 2011
    ...the City, as well as VHWU1 lot purchasers, that Parcel F would remain open space in perpetuity.” See Knight v. City of Albuquerque, 110 N.M. 265, 266, 794 P.2d 739, 740 (Ct.App.1990) (“[A] developer will not be allowed to induce purchasers to buy property by purporting to include open space......
  • Agua Fria Save the Open Space Ass'n v. Rowe
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • 8 Abril 2011
    ...77 N.M. 730, 427 P.2d 249 (1967); Cree Meadows, Inc. (NSL) v. Palmer, 68 N.M. 479, 362 P.2d 1007 (1961); and Knight v. City of Albuquerque, 110 N.M. 265, 794 P.2d 739 (Ct.App.1990), and (2) the Saving Clause, which provides for the extinguishment of the restrictive covenants on any block or......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Estoppel in Property Law
    • United States
    • University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Law Review No. 77, 2021
    • Invalid date
    ...the golf course property for another purpose. 43. 678 P.2d 855 (Wyo. 1984). 44. See id. at 863. But see Knight v. City of Albuquerque, 794 P.2d 739 (N.M. Ct. App. 1990)(holding that developers who depicted a golf course on a subdivision plat were estopped from using the golf course property......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT