HardiPlank and Hypocrisy
August 8, 2012One day, Appellee Dale Allen came home to see construction workers installing “HardiPlank” siding on his neighbor’s house. This neighbor, Appellant Michael Jamison, had chosen to use HardiPlank on the exterior of his house because it is virtually indistinguishable from wood, and yet remains fire resistant, rot resistant, and insect resistant. HardiPlank does not shrink, it does not swell, and it does not absorb moisture. It turns out, however, that the one thing HardiPlank is not resistant to is the subdivision’s restrictive covenant, which required that the “exterior walls” of the homes be covered in approved materials only. And HardiPlank was not an approved material.
Allen, thus, brought suit to ensure that Jamison complied with the neighborhood’s exterior standards. The only problem: Allen himself had wrapped HIS house’s gables in HardiPlank. Jaimson pointed out Allen’s hypocrisy, arguing, under the doctrine of quasi estoppel, that Allen cannot enforce a covenant with which he failed to comply. The trial court rejected Jamison’s argument, finding that a “gable” is not the same and an “exterior wall,” and ruled in Allen’s favor. The court of appeals, however, plunged the depths of Webster’s Third New International Dictionary and determined that a “gable” does, in fact, qualify as an exterior wall. Having so determined, the Court then held that Allen was estopped from suing to require that Jamison comply with the very covenant he refused to abide by.
Jamison v. Allen, No. 05-11-00603-CV