United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Spartanburg Division
INGLES MARKETS, INC. and SKY KING, INC., Plaintiffs,
MARIA, LLC, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S
MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT
GEIGER LEWIS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
an action for specific performance and declaratory and
injunctive relief seeking to prevent Defendant from
proceeding with certain commercial construction. The Court
has jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C. §
1332. Pending before the Court is Defendant's Motion to
Alter or Amend Judgment (Defendant's Motion) under Rules
59(e) and 52(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Defendant's Motion, it requests the Court alter or amend
its October 18, 2016, Order (Order) entering judgment in
favor of Plaintiffs on their claim for injunctive relief.
Having carefully considered Defendant's Motion, the
response, the reply, the record, and the applicable law, it
is the judgment of the Court Defendant's Motion will be
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
background facts relevant to this Motion are undisputed.
Plaintiff Ingles Markets, Inc. (Ingles) leases commercial
retail space in a shopping center (the Shopping Center) in
Spartanburg, South Carolina, owned by Plaintiff Sky King,
Inc. (Sky King). Jaylin Spartanburg South, LLC (Jaylin) was
the original owner of the Shopping Center. Jaylin recorded a
Declaration of Reciprocal Easements (REA) for the Shopping
Center in the Spartanburg County Register of Deeds on June
sets forth certain use and development restrictions for the
5.3 is the portion of the REA at issue in this matter. It
5.3 Restrictions Relating to Development.
Development and use restrictions shall limit the construction
to be performed on Parcels 1, 2 and 3 to the construction of
one building of one story and no more than twenty-four (24)
feet in height in the locations, and with the requisite
parking spaces, shown on Exhibit “E” attached
ECF No. 1-3 at 7. Exhibit E, however, was not attached to the
REA recorded in the Register of Deeds.
and Miriam Akkary (the Akkarys) are the controlling owners of
Defendant. They have operated two businesses in the Shopping
Center since around 2001 when they first entered into leases
with Jaylin. On or about January 7, 2011, the Akkarys entered
into a contract with Jaylin for the purchase of .91 acres,
which is the subject of this litigation (Subject Property).
The REA is included in the chain of title of the Subject
Property, and Jaylin provided a copy of the REA to the
Akkarys. Jaylin did not, however, provide a copy of the
Exhibit E referenced in ¶ 5.3 of the REA to the Akkarys.
owning the Subject Property for several years, the Akkarys,
operating through Defendant, entered into an agreement for
the construction of a single building of approximately 8, 800
square feet on the Subject Property. Shortly after learning
about Defendant's proposed construction, Plaintiffs filed
their Complaint on December 22, 2014. ECF No. 1. In the
Complaint, Plaintiffs contend Defendant's proposed
development of the Subject Property violates the REA,
specifically ¶ 5.3 of the REA and Exhibit E referenced
in that paragraph. The Complaint seeks, among other things, a
permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant from constructing
any building on the Subject Property in violation of the REA,
including Exhibit E.
the Court ruled on motions for summary judgment filed by
Defendant and Plaintiffs, the only issues remaining in the
case were whether the document proffered by Plaintiffs as
Exhibit E to the REA was in fact agreed to by Jaylin and
intended to be filed with the REA and whether Defendant had
actual or constructive notice of the document such that a
permanent injunction should be issued. See ECF No.
Court held a bench trial on August 17, 2016, and September
27, 2016, to resolve these issues. ECF Nos. 85, 91. The Court
issued its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on October
18, 2016, holding for the Plaintiff on the remaining issues
and permanently enjoining Defendant from erecting any