Opinion
210469
10-13-2021
MARK D. WELLS, ET AL. v. SEAN BEVILLE, ET AL.
Counsel Eric H. Ferguson (Rhodes & Ferguson Attorneys at Law) for appellants. James I. Gilbert, IV (Gilbert Law, PC) for appellees.
The Circuit Court of Pittsylvania County; S. Moreau, Judge.
Counsel Eric H. Ferguson (Rhodes & Ferguson Attorneys at Law) for appellants.
James I. Gilbert, IV (Gilbert Law, PC) for appellees.
GRANTED APPEAL SUMMARY
Assignments of Error
1. The Circuit Court erred in failing to apply the plain and unambiguous meaning of the language used in Restrictive Covenants #4 and #8 as used in Deed Book 540, Page 508.
2. The Circuit Court erred in finding that Mark and Emily Wells lacked the vertical privity necessary to enforce Restrictions #4 and #8 against Sean and Carolyn Beville.
3. The Circuit Court erred in finding that Mark and Emily Wells had "unclean hands" which led to their being estopped in enforcing Restrictions #4 and #8 when the actions of Sean and Carolyn Beville were clear violations of the Restrictions prior to the purchase of Lot 2 by Mark and Emily Wells.
4. The Circuit Court erred in finding that the enforcement of Restrictions #4 and #8 would cause an undue burden upon Sean and Carolyn Beville which would result in unjust enrichment of Mark and Emily Wells.