TAFT, J.
If we assume, as plaintiff contends and the courts below held, that the word "which" in restriction No. 1 modifies the word "lots," the question still remains whether the use that defendants propose to make of a part of lot No. 29 will constitute a use for other than "residence purposes" within the meaning of those words in that restriction.
It is apparent that these restrictions contemplate use of part of a lot for a private lane or driveway as a...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
