Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
![](http://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/assets/forums/sponsors/hospitable-deef083b895516ce26951b0ca48cf8f170861d742d4a4cb6cf5d19396b5eaac6.png)
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
![](http://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/assets/forums/sponsors/equity_trust-2bcce80d03411a9e99a3cbcf4201c034562e18a3fc6eecd3fd22ecd5350c3aa5.avif)
![](http://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/assets/forums/sponsors/equity_1031_exchange-96bbcda3f8ad2d724c0ac759709c7e295979badd52e428240d6eaad5c8eff385.avif)
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback
Updated almost 3 years ago on . Most recent reply
![Peter Walther's profile image](https://bpimg.biggerpockets.com/no_overlay/uploads/social_user/user_avatar/44092/1694560083-avatar-pwalt35907.jpg?twic=v1/output=image/cover=128x128&v=2)
VA Supreme Court finds restrictions unenforceable
Here's a VA Supreme Court decision I found interesting and thought some of you might also. It goes to show why I doubt title insurance can ever be eliminated based on a blockchain type software program.
In the case of Wells v. Beville, the Bevilles purchased Lots 1&2 in a s/d. The property was encumbered by several restriction including two that read:
Lots 1and 2 shall be considered one lot.
Lot No. 1 herein conveyed shall not be sold unless Lot No. 2 is sold to the same person at the same time.
The Bevilles then sold Lot 2 but not Lot 1 to the Wells. Sometime later the Belvilles contracted to sell Lot 1 to a third party and the Wells objected and attempted the purchase Lot 1 themselves. The Belvilles refused to sell to the Wells and this suit followed with the Court finding in part:
The restrictive covenants at issue here, viewed in light of the appellants’ argument, suffer from a fatal flaw. Specifically, while the restrictive covenants expressly require Lot 1 to be sold contemporaneously with Lot 2, the covenants do not contain any reciprocal language requiring Lot 2 to be sold contemporaneously with Lot 1. Under the terms of the restrictive covenants, then, Lot 2 may be sold separately from Lot 1. Thus, the Bevilles did not violate the restrictive covenants when they sold Lot 2 to the appellants.