CONTRACTS - RESTRAINT OF TRADE - LEGALITY OF COVENANT RESTRICTING USE OF LAND BY THE PURCHASER WHERE NO GOODWILL TRANSFERRED

Authors

Thomas K. Fisher, University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Defendants' intestate, who owned large interests in two lime companies operating in Washington and California, entered into a contract for the sale of a tract of land to plaintiff's predecessor in title. The contract contained a restrictive covenant to the effect that the grantee, or those claiming under him, would not use any of the limerock in said land for the purpose of making lime. Subsequently the grantor died, and the conveyance and execution of a deed, which included within its provisions the restrictive covenant, were made by the administrator of grantor's estate, pursuant to court order. Plaintiff brought an action to cancel the restrictive covenant. Held, that such a restriction was a reasonable one for the grantor to make for the protection of his interest in the lime business, that it was not materially in restraint of trade, and therefore would stand as against plaintiff. Messett v. Cowell, (Wash. 1938) 79 P. (2d) 337.

Recommended Citation

Thomas K. Fisher, CONTRACTS - RESTRAINT OF TRADE - LEGALITY OF COVENANT RESTRICTING USE OF LAND BY THE PURCHASER WHERE NO GOODWILL TRANSFERRED, 37 Mich. L. Rev. 651 (1939).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol37/iss4/16