This legal case involves Four Colonies Homes Association and James A. Kiekel and others. Four Colonies attempted to restrict renting on lot owners in their subdivision through a bylaw amendment, but the court found that Four Colonies did not have the authority to impose the restriction through a bylaw amendment. The court also denied Four Colonies' request for injunctive relief. The Four Colonies subdivision was subject to property use restrictions under the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions, which could be amended by 75% of the lot owners. The Bylaws could be amended by a majority vote of lot owners at a meeting. As of 2005, the Declaration had not been formally amended. In 1997, Four Colonies proposed a bylaw amendment to restrict property rentals, but the vote was cancelled due to a conflict with the Declaration. In 2004, Four Colonies proposed another bylaw amendment that would impose various limitations on lot owners' rights to rent their property, but the court found in favor of the Kiekels, affirming the district court's decision.

The legal case involves Four Colonies Homes Association and the Kiekels. The issue is whether Four Colonies can restrict lot owners' rental rights through a Bylaws amendment. The court must interpret Four Colonies' Declaration and Bylaws, and covenants and agreements restricting the free use of property are strictly construed against limitations upon such use. The district court erred in finding that the Declaration authorized the board to restrict owners' rental rights through a bylaw amendment. Four Colonies cannot circumvent the intent of the Declaration by amending the Bylaws.

The district court erred in allowing rental restrictions through a bylaw amendment. The Kiekels' rental activity doesn't violate the commercial use restriction in the Declaration. Four Colonies failed to prove that the Kiekels' tenants were more likely than others to engage in disruptive activities and that the maintenance problems associated with the Kiekels' rental properties were worse than those of other properties in the subdivision. The district court denied Four Colonies' request to prevent the Kiekels from renting their property, as it was too broad and did not violate any restrictions. The court found that Four Colonies could not restrict renting by amending the Bylaws and that the 2004 bylaw amendment imposing rental restrictions is void. The district court erred in denying the Kiekels' petition for declaratory judgment. The decision is affirmed in part and reversed in part.