ÿWPCn 8#  UN+ %y 04 0³³bfw@n4®ÂºÑj‹Nõ 0D÷^ ; G AQI mš 0J± 0Tû 0^O 0h­ 0r 0|‡ 0† 0‰ 1u BŽ Æ« 0Dq 0@µ 0Dõ 0d9 D/ BÌ D3éU>B)ZDCƒ AMÆU*F=šƒv~vÓ›˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ'í€"  Z 6Times New Roman Regular¼( ¤U$¡¡Ó  Ó(c(2pU$¤¤Ý ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€XNÚX¼¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù- ~DD€DU‚UƒÀ„ …†Ó€ê‚_#3|xAltonVandergriffsLonasFrizzellFrizzellsMaymeOlenaMicheleHerronMoore v. Phillips - opinion Î0 '  0 .   (#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÄi®$ˆ!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a) dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd 'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d00007Border 1dd!#1Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial <Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€/ÔÔ€/¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€3ÔÔ€3ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€3XÔÌÌMay€29,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€/ÔÔ€/¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÔ€/XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔSubdivision€means€any€division€of€land€into€parcels€of€less€than€five€(5)€acres€for€theÏpurpose,€whether€immediate€or€future,€of€sale€or€building€development,€and€includes€Ô_ÔresubdivisionÔ_ÔÏand,€when€appropriate€to€the€context,€relates€to€the€process€of€Ô_ÔresubdividingÔ_Ô€or€to€the€land€or€areaÏsubdivided.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€13„3„401(4)(B)€(1992).ÌPtPtHHØ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€/ÔÔ€/¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ „ ÑÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€æ¸¼¼ddÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€/„Ôò ò›Þ ÞÌ̜ـ!ÙßR€241A1-j|LÿS` ç `€€@ÿRß›à@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEó óÌÔ€/¼ÔÌÌÌÌWAYNE€MOORE€and€wifeà àà àà à)ÌDONNA€MOORE,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiffs/Appellees,à àà àà à)à àÔ_ÔSequatchieÔ_Ô€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€1645ÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌRANDALL€PHILLIPS,€SR.€and€wifeà àà à)à àAppeal€No.ÌœMAYME€PHILLIPS;›à àà àà àà à)à à01A01„9605„CH„00197ÌRANDALL€F.€PHILLIPS,€JR.€and€wifeà à)ÌMICHELLE€PHILLIPS;€andà àà àà à)ÌKENNETH€LYNN€Ô_ÔHERRONÔ_Ô,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Appellants.à àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÔ€/îÔà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURTÌà@ àFOR€Ô_ÔSEQUATCHIEÔ_Ô€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€Ô_ÔDUNLAPÔ_Ô,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€JEFFREY€F.€STEWART,€CHANCELLORÌÔ€/¼ÔÌÌÌÌòòFor€Plaintiffs/Appelleesóó:à àà àà àà àà àòòFor€Defendants/Appellantsóó:ÌÌStephen€T.€Greerà àà àà àà àà àà àHoward€L.€Ô_ÔUpchurchÔ_ÔÌÔ_ÔDunlapÔ_Ô,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àà àÔ_ÔPikevilleÔ_Ô,€TennesseeÌÔ€/„Ôò òÌÌÌÌà@ àAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDÌó óÌÔ€/¼ÔÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÇÑ Ü ÑÑ ° ÑÔ€/„Ôò òòòà@ àO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÌÌÔ€/¼ÔÓ€Óà àThis€appeal€involves€the€enforcement€of€restrictions€on€the€use€of€propertyÏin€a€rural€subdivision€in€Ô_ÔSequatchieÔ_Ô€County.€€After€their€neighbors€permitted€aÏmobile€home€to€be€placed€on€their€property,€two€property€owners€filed€suit€in€theÏChancery€Court€for€Ô_ÔSequatchieÔ_Ô€County€seeking€to€enforce€common€restrictionsÏagainst€mobile€homes.€œ€The›€trial€court€upheld€the€restrictions€and€directed€theÏremoval€of€the€mobile€home.€€The€owners€of€the€property€on€which€the€mobileÏhome€was€located€and€the€owner€of€the€mobile€home€have€appealed.€€We€haveÏdetermined€that€the€evidence€supports€the€trial€courtððs€decision€to€enforce€theÏrestrictions€and,€therefore,€affirm€the€judgment.€ÌÌà@ àò òI.ó óÌÌà àAlton€and€Ô_ÔOlenaÔ_Ô€Rogers€owned€several€acres€of€undeveloped€land€alongÏState€Highway€28€and€West€Valley€Road€in€the€Ô_ÔDossÔ_Ô€Community€in€southernÏÔ_ÔSequatchieÔ_Ô€County.€€They€decided€to€divide€the€property€into€smaller€individualÏparcels€to€be€sold€as€single€family€home€sites.€€Beginning€in€February€1977€andÏcontinuing€through€January€1979,€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Rogers€sold€seven€separateÏparcels€from€one€to€three€acres€in€size€to€various€buyers.€€€€ÌÌà àMr.€and€Mrs.€Rogers€never€recorded€a€subdivisionÔ_Ô× ƒ5 ××  ×Ô_Ô€plat€or€any€otherÏuniform€declaration€of€restrictions€governing€the€use€of€the€subdivided€property.€ÍInstead,€they€included€restrictions€in€five€of€the€seven€deeds,€but€even€theseÏrestrictions€were€not€uniform€or€consistent.€€The€restrictions€covered:€(a)€usingÏthe€property€for€residential€purposes€only,€(b)€not€using€the€property€forÏcommercial€purposes,€(c)€constructing€a€single€residence€with€at€least€1,000Ïsquare€feet,€and€(d)€prohibiting€mobile€homes€temporarily€or€permanently.€€TheÏrestrictions€in€the€deeds€to€each€of€the€seven€parcels€are€as€follows:Ìò òÓÓÌà àà àDate€ofà àà àOriginalà àà àà àApplicableÌòòTract€No.à àOriginal€Saleà àPurchaserà àà àà àRestrictive€Covenantsó óóóÌÌÓ#` °‚XŒ <À–X#Óà à1à àà à2/9/77à àà àMooreà àà àà àa,€b,€c,€&€dÌÌà à2à àà à3/23/77à àà àMooreà àà àà àa,€b,€c,€&€dÌÌà à3à àà à3/31/77à àà àÔ_ÔFrizzellÔ_Ô€(now€Phillips)à àa,€b,€&€d;Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àand€c€with€a€minimumÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà à1200€sq.€ft.€restrictionÌÌà à4à àà à4/25/77à àà àBowman€(now€Ô_ÔHigdonÔ_Ô)à ànoneÌÌà à5à àà à6/6/77à àà àBowman€(now€Ô_ÔHigdonÔ_Ô)à àa,€b,€c,€&€dÌÌà à6à àà à5/6/78à àà àRoberts€(now€Moore)à ànoneÌÌà à7à àà à1/16/79à àà àMooreà àà àà àdÌÌÌÓ€ÓÓ ` °„X<h—XW Óà àIn€February€and€March€1977,€Wayne€and€Donna€Moore€purchased€twoÏadjoining€tracts,€totaling€three€œacres,›€and€constructed€a€2,100€square€feet€brickÏhome.€€In€January€1979,€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Moore€acquired€another€one„acre€tractÏadjoining€the€first€two€they€had€already€purchased.€€In€1986€they€purchasedÏanother€adjoining€two„acre€tract€from€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Charles€œÔ_ÔVandergriffÔ_Ô›€whoÍhad€purchased€the€property€from€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Lonas€C.€Roberts,€who€hadÏpurchased€it€in€1978€from€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Rogers.ÌÌà àIn€March€1977€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Rogers€sold€a€2.5€acre€tract€adjoining€theÏMooresðð€property€to€Terry€D.€and€Rhonda€Ô_ÔFrizzellÔ_Ô.€€In€1993€the€Ô_ÔFrizzellsÔ_Ô€soldÏtheir€property€to€Randall€and€Ô_ÔMaymeÔ_Ô€Phillips.€€The€warranty€deed,€recordedÏSeptember€29,€1993,€contained€the€following€express€restrictions:€€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThis€conveyance€is€made€subject€to€the€followingÏrestrictions,€limitations,€and€reservations,€which€shall€beÏbinding€upon€the€purchaser€and€all€future€owners:ÌÌà8 àà8 à1.à àSaid€land€shall€be€used€for€residential€purposes€only.ÌÌà8 àà8 à2.à àNo€commercial€use€of€trade€of€non„residentialÏactivities€shall€be€permitted€on€the€above€described€lot,Ïnor€shall€any€commercial€building€be€built€on€the€aboveÏdescribed€lot.ÌÌà8 àà8 à3.à àOnly€one€residence€shall€be€built€on€the€aboveÏdescribed€lot€with€a€minimum€of€one€thousand€twoÏhundred€(1,200)€square€feet.ÌÌà8 àà8 à4.à àNo€mobile€homes,€temporary€or€otherwise,€to€beÏplaced€on€the€above€described€property.ÌÌÌÓ€Óà àMr.€and€Mrs.€Phillips€did€not€improve€their€property€and€eventuallyÏdecided€to€attempt€to€remove€the€restrictions€on€their€use€of€the€property€fromÏtheir€deed.€€On€March€22,€1994,€they€executed€an€agreement€with€both€theirÏimmediate€grantors€and€Ô_Ôwith€the€surviving€original€developer€of€the€property,Ïpurporting€to€revoke€and€remove€the€restrictions€on€the€property.€€TheÏagreement€recited:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àNOW,€THEREFORE,€FOR€AND€INÏCONSIDERATION€of€the€sum€of€One€($1.00)€Dollar,Ïcash€in€hand€paid,€and€other€good€and€valuableÏconsiderations,€the€receipt€of€which€is€herebyÏacknowledged,€we,€Ô_ÔOLENAÔ_Ô€B.€ROGERS,€œwidow›€ofÏAlton€D.€Rogers,€and€TERRY€D.€Ô_ÔFRIZZELLÔ_Ô€and€wife,ÏRHONDA€M.€Ô_ÔFRIZZELLÔ_Ô,€being€the€grantor€andÏgrantees€in€that€certain€deed€dated€March€31,€1977,€andÏrecorded€in€Deed€Book€43,€œpage›€380,€in€the€RegisterððsÏOffice€of€Ô_ÔSequatchieÔ_Ô€County,€Tennessee,€in€and€byÏwhich€certain€restrictions€were€imposed,€andÏRANDALL€PHILLIPS€and€wife,€Ô_ÔMAYMEÔ_Ô€PHILLIPS,Ïdo€hereby€wholly€and€completely€revoke,€cancel,€œannul,›Ïand€remove€said€restrictions€as€œrecited›€in€said€deed,€andÏspecify€that€said€restrictions€shall€be€of€no€further€forceÏœor›€effect.ÌÌÌÓ€Óà àMr.€and€Mrs.€Phillips€thereafter€conveyed€a€portion€of€their€Ô_ÔpropertyÔ_Ô€toÏtheir€œson›€and€daughter„in„law,€Randall€and€Michele€Phillips.€€The€younger€coupleÏconstructed€a€house€on€that€property.€€Sometime€toward€the€end€of€1994,€theÏsenior€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Phillips€permitted€Kenneth€Ô_ÔHerronÔ_Ô€to€move€a€mobile€homeÏonto€their€remaining€property€and€œlive›€there€temporarily€until€the€house€œMr.ÏHerron€was›€building€elsewhere€was€completed.€€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Moore€complainedÏto€Mr.€and€Mrs.€œPhillips,€Sr.›€that€œthe€presence›€of€Mr.€Ô_ÔHerronÔ_Ôððs€trailer€on€theirÏproperty€violated€the€restrictions€in€their€deeds.€€When€Mr.€and€Mrs.€œPhillips,€Sr.›Ïdeclined€to€have€the€trailer€removed,€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Moore€filed€suit€in€theÏChancery€Court€for€Ô_ÔSequatchieÔ_Ô€County€seeking€both€injunctive€relief€and€damagesÏfor€violations€of€the€restrictive€covenants€that€they€contended€applied€to€theÏproperty.€€ÌÌà àFollowing€a€bench€trial€in€October€1995,€the€trial€court€found€(1)€that€Mr.Ïand€Mrs.€Rogers€were€the€common€grantors€of€all€the€parcels€involved€in€thisÏdispute,€(2)€that€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Rogers€subdivided€and€sold€their€property€under€aÏcommon€plan,€(3)€that€the€four€restrictions€in€the€deeds€prepared€by€Mr.€andÏMrs.€Rogers€ran€with€the€land,€and€(4)€that€the€restrictions€applied€to€all€parcelsÏat€issue.€€The€trial€court€also€held€that€the€restrictions€were€in€the€nature€ofÏnegative€reciprocal€easements€and€could€be€enforced€by€any€of€the€ownersÏholding€property€in€the€common€development.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€courtÏfound€that€the€attempted€revocation€of€the€restrictions€on€Mr.€and€Mrs.€PhillipsððÏproperty€was€legally€void€and€ordered€Mr.€Ô_ÔHerronÔ_Ô€to€remove€his€mobile€homeÏfrom€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Phillipsðð€property.€€The€trial€court€also€enjoined€all€theÏparties€from€violating€any€of€the€restrictions€on€the€parcels.ÌÌà@ àò òII.Ìó óÌà àIt€is€well„settled€that€property€owners€may€subdivide€their€property€forÏsale€and€place€restrictions€on€the€use€of€each€parcel€sold€for€the€benefit€of€bothÏthemselves€and€œthe€buyers.›€€òòSee€Laughlin€v.€Wagneróó,€146€Tenn.€647,€653,€244ÏÔ_ÔS.W.Ô_Ô€475,€476€(1922);€€òòBenton€v.€Bushóó,€644€S.W.2d€690,€691€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ï1982).€€One€of€the€most€common€forms€for€imposing€restrictions€on€subdividedÏproperty€is€for€the€property€owner€to€establish€a€general€building€plan€ofÏimprovement€covering€a€tract€of€land€divided€into€lots.€€òòSee€Arthur€v.€Lake€Ô_ÔTansiÔ_ÔÏVillage,€Inc.óó,€590€S.W.2d€923,€928€(Tenn.€1979).€€ÌÌà àProperty€owners€may€establish€a€subdivision€plan€in€a€number€of€ways.€ÏThey€may€expressly€enter€into€reciprocal€covenants€promising€to€insert€likeÍrestrictive€covenants€in€all€deeds€conveying€property€out€of€the€divided€tract.€€òòSeeÏArthur€v.€Lake€Ô_ÔTansiÔ_Ô€Village,€Inc.óó,€590€S.W.2d€at€928.€€They€may€also€establish€aÏgeneral€subdivision€plan€by€selling€lots€while€making€oral€statements€inducingÏbuyers€to€rely€that€all€lots€will€be€sold€with€the€same€restrictions.€€òòSee€Arthur€v.ÏLake€Ô_ÔTansiÔ_Ô€Village,€Inc.óó,€590€S.W.2d€at€928.€€The€restrictive€language€containedÏin€a€series€of€deeds€conveying€parcels€out€of€a€common€tract€of€land€may€alsoÏestablish€a€general€subdivision€plan.€€òòSeeóó€òòRidley€v.€Ô_ÔHaimanÔ_Ôóó,€164€Tenn.€239,€œ255„57,›€47€S.W.2d€750,€755€(1932);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòSwanson€v.€Greenóó,€572€So.2d€1246,Ï1248€(Ala.€1990).€€ÌÌà àWhere€property€owners€intended€to€establish€a€general€subdivision€plan,Ïthe€fact€that€some€lots€in€a€subdivision€are€sold€with€no€restrictions€does€notÏinvalidate€restrictions€on€the€other€subdivided€lots.€€òòSee€McIntyre€v.€Bakeróó,€660ÏN.E.2d€348,€352€(Ind.€Ct.€App.€1996).€€A€grantor€may€intend€to€establish€aÏgeneral€subdivision€plan€even€if€the€restrictions€on€all€the€lots€are€not€perfectlyÏidentical.€òòSee€Ô_ÔOwenbyÔ_Ô€v.€Boringóó,€38€Tenn.€App.€540,€547,€551,€276€S.W.2d€757,Ï760,€762€(1954).ÌÌà àWhen€a€property€owner€sells€parcels€of€a€tract€and€includes€in€the€warrantyÏdeeds€restrictive€covenants€for€the€benefit€of€other€buyers,€then€grantees€acquireÏnot€absolute,€unqualified€title,€but€rather€title€limited€by€the€deed€restrictions.€ÏòòSee€Ridley€v.€Ô_ÔHaimanÔ_Ôóó,€164€Tenn.€at€251,€47€S.W.2d€at€753.€€The€enforceableÏinterests€arising€in€grantees€from€such€restrictive€covenants€are€now€commonlyÏknown€in€Tennessee€as€reciprocal€negative€easements.€€òòSee€Leach€v.€Larkinóó,€No.Ï01A01„9302„CH„00066,€1993€WL€377629,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€œSept.€24,€1993)›Ïœ(No›€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€11€application€filed).ÌÌà àBuyers€of€restricted€subdivision€property€may€normally€enforce€suchÏrestrictions€against€other€subdivision€grantees.€€òòSee€Land€Developers,€Inc.€v.ÏMaxwellóó,€537€S.W.2d€904,€912€(Tenn.€1976);€òòLeach€v.€Larkinóó,€1993€WLÏ377629,€at€*3.€€Grantees€seeking€to€enforce€reciprocal€negative€easements€mustÏprove:€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(1)€that€the€parties€derived€their€titles€from€a€commonÏgrantor;€(2)€that€the€common€grantor€had€a€general€planÏfor€the€property€involved;€(3)€that€the€common€grantorÏintended€for€the€restrictive€covenant€to€benefit€theÏproperty€involved;€and€(4)€that€the€grantees€had€actualÏor€constructive€knowledge€of€the€restriction€when€theyÏpurchased€their€parcels.€€ÌÌÓ€ÓòòSeeóó€òòRidley€v.€Ô_ÔHaimanÔ_Ôóó,€164€Tenn.€at€256,€47€S.W.2d€at€755.ÌÌà àParties€may€lose€their€right€over€time€to€enforce€restrictive€covenants€if€theÏcovenants€relate€to€the€existing€condition€of€the€property€and€its€surroundings.€€IfÏthe€character€of€the€neighborhood€completely€changes€thereby€defeating€theÏoriginal€purpose€of€the€covenants,€the€courts€will€not€enforce€the€covenants€if€toÏdo€so€would€be€inequitable€and€unjust.€€òòSee€Ô_ÔHysingerÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔMullinaxÔ_Ôóó,€204€Tenn.€181,Ï187,€319€S.W.2d€79,€82€œ(1958);›€òòHackett€v.€Steeleóó,€201€Tenn.€120,€129,€297ÏœS.W.2d›€63,€67€(1956).€€Courts€will€likewise€decline€to€enforce€reciprocalÏnegative€easements€where€their€purpose€has€been€defeated€by€a€radical€change€inÏthe€character€of€the€neighborhood.€€òòSee€Hackett€v.€Steeleóó,€201€Tenn.€at€129,€297ÏS.W.2d€at€66.ÌÌà àIt€is€undisputed€that€all€the€parties€in€this€case€derived€their€titles€from€aÏcommon€grantor.€€It€is€also€undisputed€that€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Phillips€hadÍconstructive€notice,€by€virtue€of€their€warranty€deed,€of€the€restrictions€on€theÏproperty€when€they€purchased€their€lot.€€The€Ô_ÔdispositiveÔ_Ô€issue€in€this€appeal€isÏthus€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€holding€that€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Rogers€had€aÏgeneral€plan€or€scheme€for€the€subdivision€of€the€property.€€The€trial€court€foundÏthat€such€a€general€subdivision€plan€existed.€€We€review€that€determination€deÏnovo€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€unless€the€evidence€preponderatesÏotherwise.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€Rule€13(d);€òòRandolph€v.€Randolphóó,€937€S.W.2dÏ815,€819€(Tenn.€1996).ÌÌà àThe€evidence€makes€plain€that€when€the€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Moore€purchased€theÏoriginal€subdivision€parcels,€they€wanted€restrictions€within€the€entire€subdivisionÏprohibiting€both€mobile€homes€and€the€placement€of€more€than€one€residence€onÏa€parcel.€€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Rogers€placed€restrictive€covenants€to€that€effect€in€theÏdeeds€covering€the€first€three€parcels.€€The€price€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Moore€paid€forÏtheir€original€parcels€reflected€its€restricted€nature,€and€as€buyers,€they€relied€onÏthose€restrictions.€€The€fact€that€the€last€parcel€they€purchased€was€unrestricted€byÏdeed€did€not€matter€to€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Moore€because€they€intended€to€use€theÏproperty€consistent€with€the€general€subdivision€restrictions.ÌÌà àMr.€and€Mrs.€Rogers€did€not€place€the€restrictions€on€the€property€forÏtheir€personal€benefit.€€They€did€not€live€on€the€property,€and€once€theyÏsubdivided€the€tract,€they€sold€all€the€parcels€without€retaining€any€of€the€land€forÏthemselves.€€Although€the€parcels€by€deed€are€not€perfectly,€uniformly€restricted,Ïthe€restrictions€used€are€similar€in€aim€and€are€all€consistent€with€theÏdevelopment€of€a€single„family€frame€home€neighborhood.€€The€evidence€doesÏnot€preponderate€against€the€trial€court's€conclusion€that€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Rogers,€asÍthe€common€grantors,€intended€to€establish€a€general€subdivision€plan€for€theÏproperty.€€Therefore,€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Moore€could€properly€insist€on€theÏrestrictions'€enforcement.ÌÌà àWe€are€not€persuaded€that€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Mooreððs€conduct€in€having€a€barn,Ïsome€farm€equipment,€and€a€few€head€of€livestock€on€their€parcels€constituted€aÏœð ðcommercial›€œuseðð›€of€subdivision€property€that€would€Ô_ÔestopÔ_Ô€them€to€enforce€theÏsubdivision€restrictions.€€The€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trialÏcourt's€finding€on€that€point.€€Nor€are€we€persuaded€that€the€area€around€theÏsubdivision€has€so€radically€changed€since€the€late€1970's€so€as€to€make€itÏinequitable€now€to€enforce€the€subdivision€restrictions.€€When€Mr.€and€Mrs.ÏMoore€bought€their€first€lots€in€1977,€an€established€trailer€park€existed€on€theÏopposite€side€of€West€Valley€Road.€€The€park€in€1977€had€twenty„five€or€twenty„six€trailers;€its€former€owner€testified€that€two€or€three€years€ago,€when€he€soldÏthe€park,€it€had€œð ðclose›€to€œthirty.ð𛀀That€hardly€constitutes€a€radical€change€in€theÏneighborhood's€character.€€As€to€the€other€development€pointed€to€by€Mr.€andÏMrs.€Phillips,€it€is€outside€the€subdivision.ÌÌà àMr.€and€Mrs.€Phillips€and€their€allies€also€contend€that€even€if€Mr.€andÏMrs.€Rogers€originally€sold€the€parcels€pursuant€to€a€general€subdivision€plan,ÏMrs.€Rogers,€and€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Ô_ÔFrizzellÔ_Ô,€as€mesne€grantors,€later€œð ðreleasedðð›€theÏsubdivision€restrictions€on€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Phillipsðð€lot.€€Mr.€and€Ô_ÔMrsÔ_Ô.€PhillipsÏargue€that€because€deeds€are€contractual€instruments,€the€parties€to€a€deed€œcan,›€byÏœagreement,›€change€the€contractual€terms€post„sale€to€remove€subdivisionÏrestrictions.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€correctly€rejected€that€argument€as€a€matter€of€law.€ÏSubdivision€restrictions€are€intended€to€benefit€all€lot€owners€within€aÏsubdivision,€and€any€attempted€unilateral€release€of€the€restrictions€without€theÏassent€of€the€other€subdivision€owners€is€of€no€effect.€€òòSee€Ridley€v.€Ô_ÔHaimonÔ_Ôóó,€164ÏTenn.€at€247,€47€S.W.2d€at€752;€òòÔ_ÔCaudillÔ_Ô€v.€Hamletóó,€490€S.W.2d€538,€œ542›€(Tenn.ÏCt.€App.€1972);€òòÔ_ÔGercasÔ_Ô€v.€Davisóó,€188€So.2d€9,€11€(Fla.€Dist.€Ct.€App.€1966);ÏòòWaterððs€Edge€Homeownersðð€Ô_ÔAssððnÔ_Ô,€Inc.€v.€Ô_ÔWeissmanÔ_Ôóó,€614€Ô_ÔN.Y.S.Ô_Ô€2d€67,€68„69Ï(App.€Div.€1994);€òòSmith€v.€Butler€Mountain€Estatesóó,€375€S.E.2d€905,€908€(N.C.Ï1989);€òòFarmer€v.€Thompsonóó,€289€S.W.2d€351,€355€(Tex.€Civ.€App.€1956).€€TheÏtrial€court€correctly€gave€no€effect€to€the€March€22,€1994€Revocation€andÏRemoval€of€Restrictions.ÌÌà@ àò òIII.ÌÌó óà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€and€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€forÏwhatever€further€Ô_ÔproceedingÔ_Ô€may€be€required.€€We€also€tax€the€costs€of€thisÏappeal,€jointly€and€severally,€to€Randall€Phillips,€Sr.,€œMayme›€Phillips,€RandallÏPhillips,€Jr.,€Michelle€Phillips,€and€Kenneth€Ô_ÔHerronÔ_Ô,€and€their€surety€for€whichÏexecution,€if€Ô_ÔnecessaryÔ_Ô,€may€issue.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌ__________________________________ÌHENRY€F.€TODD,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌMIDDLE€SECTION€ÌÌÌ__________________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€œJUDGE›œ›