Sprague v. Kimball

Kimball (defendant) orally told Sprague (plaintiff), who bought several subdivision lots subject to written setback restrictions, that he intended to impose the same restrictions on remaining lots as they were sold, but Kimball's later deed conveying a remaining lot to Grossman incorporated no such restrictions; Sprague sued to enjoin that unrestricted sale, and the trial court, finding only an oral agreement existed, dismissed his complaint as barred by the statute of frauds.