THREAD: Duration clause / “until” vs “after” paraphrase
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Email 0 — FROM: [HOMEOWNER EMAIL — REDACTED] → TO: Gary Werley sgwerley@werleylaw.com]
[Timestamp: On Mar 5, 2026, at 8:39 PM]
Good Evening,

I own property in Sky Harbour and mailed your law office some important information.
It has been returned stating "the addressee is unknown at the delivery address". Do you have a new address?

Thank you.
-[HOMEOWNER NAME — REDACTED]

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Email 0.1 — FROM: Gary Werley → TO: [HOMEOWNER EMAIL — REDACTED]]
[Timestamp: Fri, Mar 6 at 6:14 AM]
[ALTERNATE MAILING ADDRESS PROVIDED BY RECIPIENT — REDACTED HERE]
Sent from my iPhone

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Email 1 — FROM: [HOMEOWNER NAME — REDACTED] → TO: Gary Werley sgwerley@werleylaw.com]
[Subject: Re-sending letter by email (prior mailing returned as “addressee unknown”)]
Mr. Werley,

Thank you for providing an alternate mailing address.

I’m re-sending the attached letter by email for the record. I previously mailed this correspondence to the address you publicly list (1840 Acton Hwy, Ste 102, Granbury, TX 76049). USPS tracking reflects the mailing is being returned as “addressee unknown.”

Because your most recent amended filing explicitly reaches Sections 1–3 and relies on language from the recorded Duration clause, I want to make clear why accuracy here matters to me personally and to many homeowners. I own property in Sections 1 and 2, and my family—including elderly parents—resides in Section 11 and holds interests in other Sky Harbour sections. The Court-facing interpretation of the duration clause has direct consequences for title and lien exposure across the subdivision. By way of context, a lien has been recorded against my Section 1 homestead citing the same 1970 dedication language at issue, so misstatements of the clause have immediate real-world consequences for my property.

Due to work constraints and lack of access to a post office today, this email is intended to serve as delivery of the attached letter and its contents. Please confirm receipt. If you disagree with the interpretation issue flagged, please identify the specific recorded sentence(s) you contend authorize the “after January 1, 1990” reading.

Regards,
[HOMEOWNER NAME — REDACTED]
[HOMEOWNER MAILING ADDRESS — REDACTED]

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Email 2 — FROM: Gary Werley → TO: [HOMEOWNER NAME — REDACTED]]
[Timestamp: Sunday, March 8, 2026 at 10:18:08 AM CDT]
The deed restrictions may not be amended for 10 years, after 10 years they may be amended

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Email 3 — FROM: [HOMEOWNER EMAIL — REDACTED] → TO: Gary Werley sgwerley@werleylaw.com]
[Timestamp: Sun, Mar 8 at 11:12 AM]
Mr. Werley,

Agreed on the narrow point: the recorded language creates a 10-year lockout from the date of recording, and then permits owner action after ten (10) years.

My concern is different and more specific: your pleading paraphrases the clause as if the owner-action mechanism operates after January 1, 1990, when the same paragraph also states the covenants “shall continue and be binding … until January 1, 1990.” Those are two separate timing concepts, and combining them in that way effectively reads the termination date out of the instrument.

Relatedly, the operative verb in the owner-action sentence is “release” (i.e., reduction), not “extend/renew/continue,” and the tail phrase “from such date” points back to the recording date of any release/change instrument (“such instrument to become effective from date of recording”).

If you maintain that the recorded language authorizes post-1990 amendment/continuation, please identify the exact sentence(s) in the recorded instrument that state that, verbatim. Otherwise, I respectfully request you correct the “after January 1, 1990” characterization in the pleadings so the Court is working from the document’s actual structure.

Regards,
[HOMEOWNER NAME — REDACTED]

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Email 4 — FROM: Gary Werley → TO: [HOMEOWNER NAME — REDACTED]]
[Timestamp: Sunday, March 8, 2026 at 06:04:47 PM CDT]
Read the last sentence
Sent from my iPhone

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Email 5 — FROM: [HOMEOWNER NAME — REDACTED] → TO: Gary Werley]
Mr. Werley,

I did read the last sentence. Respectfully, it doesn’t do what your pleading’s “after January 1, 1990” paraphrase implies.

The last sentence is grammatically tied to the immediately preceding language that says any owner instrument “becomes effective from the date of recording.” The phrase “from such date” is naturally pointing back to that recording/effective date of a recorded release/change instrument — not to January 1, 1990, and not to an automatic post-1990 renewal.

A few specific points:

1. The clause contains a date-certain termination (“until January 1, 1990”). The last sentence does not contain clear override language (e.g., “notwithstanding,” “and thereafter automatically renew,” “continue beyond,” etc.) that converts a hard stop into perpetual covenants.

2. The owner-action verb is release (reduction). Nothing in the last sentence supplies missing “extend/renew/continue” authority.

3. If your position is that the “last sentence” authorizes amendments/continuation after 01/01/1990, please paste the last sentence verbatim and identify (a) what you contend “such date” refers to, and (b) the exact words you contend authorize post-1990 operation despite the stated termination.

If you can’t point to those words, then I again respectfully ask that you correct the “after January 1, 1990” characterization in the pleadings so the Court is working from the instrument’s actual structure.

Regards,
[HOMEOWNER NAME — REDACTED]
[HOMEOWNER MAILING ADDRESS — REDACTED]

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

[Email 6 — FROM: Gary Werley → TO: [HOMEOWNER NAME — REDACTED]]
You need to hire your own attorney. I am done. It says after the first 10 years continues until modified.
Sent from my iPhone

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────