William Jefferys’s parents transferred parcels of their land to the Gardners with a deed that contained a restrictive covenant that required that a specified part of the property be kept open and free of all structures, with certain exceptions. The deed indicated that the restrictive covenants were to be enforced by the grantors, their heirs and assigns. The Jefferys also conveyed a parcel of land above the Gardners to Souminen, who then conveyed that parcel to the Soules, who built a house on their land. The Jefferys deeded the remainder of their land to their son, William, and his wife. The Gardners wanted to build a structure on the restricted land and sought permission of William Jefferys. The Soules claimed that they were interested parties as assigns of the elder Jefferys. The Gardners began planting white pines directly in the Soules’ view. The Gardners filed a declaratory judgment action about this and the Soules counterclaimed. Do the benefits and the burdens of the restrictive covenant still affect the relationship between the landowners who were not parties to it originally? And does planting the trees violate the restrictive covenant if it is still effective?