This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Collard (P) bought property that was subject to a restrictive covenant that stated that no structures on the property could be altered unless the alterations had been approved by the Village of Flower Hill (D). P applied for approval to enlarge existing structures on the property. D denied approval giving no explanation. P wanted judicial review of the decision, claiming that the decision by D was arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable. The trial court ruled for P, holding that D had not acted in good faith. The appellate court reversed the decision. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.