Muirhead Hui LLC v. Forest Preserve District of Kane County
Source
Author
About This Legal Opinion
The appellate court affirmed, holding that the restrictive covenant was included at the behest of the District in order to receive a grant from the DNR. The sellers were not beneficiaries of the restrictive covenant, and had no rights to enforce it.
Disclaimer
These resources are provided "as is" for informational purposes only, without warranty of any kind. They do not constitute legal or professional advice and do not create an attorney-client relationship. They may not reflect current legal developments and should be adapted for your organization with qualified professional help. The Alliance is not liable for any damages arising from use of or reliance on these resources. Views in individual posts and third-party links/logos are not Alliance endorsements. The Alliance is committed to equal opportunity and does not condone unlawful discrimination.
For accreditation-related materials, please also consult the Land Trust Accreditation Commission website.