CHARLESTON — The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals found that a Jefferson County couple cannot invoke equitable remedies in an attempt to reinstate rights they never had in the first place.
The court reversed a 2019 circuit court order and remanded the case back for the court to enter an order granting declaratory judgment to Laura Goddard and dismiss the counterclaim by Tyler Hockman and Emily Hockman, according to a May 20 opinion.
Justice Bill Wooton authored the majority opinion. Justice Tim Armstead dissented and authored a separate opinion.
Goddard is the owner of an acreage originally designated as a common area for the use of all property owners in the Falcon Ridge subdivision located in Jefferson County, sought a declaratory judgment that the subject property, having been purchased by her predecessors in interest at a trustee’s sale following the original owner’s default on a loan secured by a deed of trust on the parent tract, is free of any covenants or restrictions that post-dated the execution of the deed of trust.
The circuit court denied relief, finding that neither the petitioner nor her predecessors in interest were bona fide, or “innocent,” purchasers of the acreage, citing a 1930 case.
"Consistent with this ruling, the court denied the petitioner’s request for declaratory relief and granted judgment to the defendant/respondents, Tyler and Emily A. Hockman on their counterclaim, finding that the respondents had an easement in the subject property," Wooton wrote.
The court designated its order as a final judgment and the appeal followed.
"After careful consideration of the parties’ briefs and arguments, the appendix record, and the applicable law, we conclude that the circuit court was clearly wrong in determining that the petitioner’s predecessors in interest, Brian and Sylvia Stephens were not bona fide purchasers when they acquired the subject property at the trustee’s sale," Wooton wrote. "Accordingly, we further conclude that the trustee’s sale of the acreage to Mr. and Mrs. Stephens extinguished all prior covenants and restrictions that post-dated the execution of the deed of trust, and that their successor in interest, the petitioner, took the subject property free and clear of all such covenants and restrictions."
Armstead dissented, saying that he felt the majority opinion incorrectly concluded that the foreclosure by Jefferson Security Bank extinguished the prior covenants and restrictions.
"The facts demonstrate that JSB held a Deed of Trust on the property in question and foreclosed upon those interests," Armstead wrote. "At foreclosure, the property at issue was sold to Mr. and Mrs. Stephens. Mr. and Mrs. Stephens then sold the property to Petitioner."
Armstead wrote that the fact that the seminal deed in the case referred back to the recorded plat is key to understanding that the petitioner had recorded notice.
West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals case number: 20-0863