Village of Kirkland v. Kirkland Properties Holdings, LLC 1

This case presents question as to whether trial court properly dismissed plaintiff-Village’s action, alleging that defendant breached terms of annexation agreement that, according to plaintiff, required that defendant-owner of certain lots in subdivision to supply letter of credit in amount proportionate to number of lots owned in subdivision to secure completion of roads in subdivision as it was developed. While trial court found that annexation agreement was covenant that ran with subdivision, said agreement would not confer successor status to defendant, where defendant purchased only portion of subdivision. Appellate Court, in reversing trial court, found that annexation agreement was binding on defendant even though it had purchased only portion of subdivision. In its petition for leave to appeal, defendant argued that annexation agreement was binding on it only if drafters of agreement had expressly stated that it was binding on owners of any portion of subdivision, and annexation agreement did not provide as such.