Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

ALBERT S. KINCHEN, MARIE A. KNOTTS, BOBBY RAY ALSTON, AND BRIARWOOD HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION v. KENNETH C. LAYTON AND VELDRON R. LAYTON

SEPTEMBER 26, 1984

ALBERT S. KINCHEN, MARIE A. KNOTTS, BOBBY RAY ALSTON, AND BRIARWOOD HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION
v.
KENNETH C. LAYTON AND VELDRON R. LAYTON



BEFORE ROY NOBLE LEE, P.J., DAN M. LEE AND ROBERTSON, JJ.

ROBERTSON, JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:

I.

What are" temporary structures "within the context of use restrictions found in protective covenants on the Briarwood West-First Addition in Harrison County, Mississippi, is the question at the core of this civil dispute.

 Kenneth C. Layton and Veldron R. Layton, Defendants below and Appellees here, own various lots within the subdivision. In June, 1982, Kenneth C. Layton (" Layton ") installed upon Lot 10 a manufactured structure clearly intended for use as a home. He states that he intends that the home be permanent.

 Albert S. Kinchen, Marie A. Knotts and Bobby Ray Alston, Plaintiffs below and Appellants here, are neighboring property owners who argue that the manufactured home is a" temporary structure "and as such may not be placed upon the lot consistent with the protective covenants.

 After trial on the merits, the Chancery Court found that the structure now situated on Lot 10, Briarwood West-First Addition Subdivision is neither a trailor, mobile home, nor temporary structure" ,

 and that nothing in the protective covenants prohibited the placement of the structure on the lot in question.

 Accordingly, on August 13, 1982, the Chancery Court entered its final decree dismissing the complaint of Kinchen, et al, with prejudice.

 Suggesting error in the resolution of the underlying question, Kinchen, et al, appeal. Because we find that the findings of the Chancellor were not only supported by substantial evidence but were eminently correct, we affirm.

 At all times relevant hereto, the protective covenants for the Briarwood West-First Addition contained the following provision:

 "6. TEMPORARY STRUCTURES: No structure of a temporary character, basement, tent, shack, garage, or other outbuilding shall be placed upon or used on any lot at any time for purpose either temporarily or permanently."

 The controversial structure placed upon Lot 10 in June of 1982 was manufactured in Georgia. The evidence reflects that it was transported to Harrison County in two sections. After removal of the wheels, running gears and tow bars, the sections were placed on previously prepared masonry peers. The two sections were then connected, and certain additions and refinements were made by Layton.

 The structure contains 1,204 square feet of living area which is centrally heated and air conditioned. It has been refined by Layton by the addition of a dutch gable and gutter on the roof, a front porch, a covered walkway along the rear, and a carport on one end. In addition, a concrete driveway and sidewalk to the front door have been installed.

 There was no issue below as to whether the structure met the applicable zoning, building, plumbing and electrical codes, nor as to whether all necessary permits had been secured by Layton before the structure was installed. Further, there is no suggestion that the structure violates any other provision of the protective covenants applicable to Briarwood West - First Addition.

 Kinchen, Knotts and Alston own homes in the vicinity of Lot 10. They object strenuously to the appearance of the structure in question. They suggest that it has the appearance of a trailer or mobile home. That the structure was transported to the site where it was installed on wheels is not the crux of Appellants' objections, They acknowledge that the same structure ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.