Laserfiche WebLink
defined program for education of the initial purchasers of lots within the development as <br /> to the limitations that effect future use of the property." <br /> 91. Neither WPLLC, Stephenson, Gherardi, nor any of their agents made any <br /> effort to educate the Plaintiffs with respect to the limitations that affect future use of the <br /> property as embodied in the Conservation Easement. <br /> 92. The Plaintiffs were not a party to the Conservation Easement. <br /> 93. The Plaintiffs did not consent to the Conservation Easement. <br /> 94. The Conservation Easement is invalid, ineffective, and unenforceable <br /> against Plaintiffs. <br /> 95. Plaintiffs are entitled to a declaratory judgment pursuant to Minn. Stat. § <br /> 555.01 as to the invalid and ineffective nature of the Conservation Easement and as to <br /> Plaintiffs' rights associated with the Conservation Easement. <br /> COUNT II <br /> Declaratory Judgment That the Subdivision of the Property Is Invalid <br /> 96. Plaintiffs restate and re-allege all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as <br /> if fully set forth herein. <br /> 97. Plaintiffs' claim involves a genuine conflict in tangible interests between <br /> parties with adverse interests, all of whom are parties to this proceeding. <br /> 98. Plaintiffs' rights as to the subdivision of the Property can only be <br /> determined by a declaratory judgment rather than through presenting hypothetical facts <br /> that would form an advisory opinion. <br /> 99. The granting of the Conservation Easement was a condition precedent to <br /> 16 <br />