Iglehart v. Phillips

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that the rule's \purpose is to ensure that property is reasonably available for development by prohibiting restraints that remove property from a beneficial use for an extended period of time\
• noting also that “[i]t is generally agreed that an option restraint is reasonable if the option price is 6 at market or appraised value, irrespective of the duration of the option”
• \[T]he law is clear that a repurchase option at market or appraised value for unlimited duration is not an unreasonable restraint.\
• “option restraint is reasonable if the option price is at market or appraised value, irrespective of the duration of the option”
• “The validity or invalidity of a restraint depends upon its long-term effect on the improvement and marketability of the property. Once that effect is determined, common sense should dictate whether it is reasonable or unreasonable.”
• fixed price preemptive rights found invalid using Restatement analysis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).