102 A. 1050 (Pa. 1918), 183, Rohrer v. Trafford Real Estate Co.

Docket Nº:183
Citation:102 A. 1050, 259 Pa. 297
Opinion Judge:MR. JUSTICE POTTER:
Party Name:Rohrer, Appellant, v. Trafford Real Estate Company
Attorney:U. G. Vogan, for appellant. John G. Buchanan, with him Gordon & Smith, for appellees.
Judge Panel:Before BROWN, C.J., POTTER, MOSCHZISKER, FRAZER and WALLING, JJ.
Case Date:January 07, 1918
Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 1050

102 A. 1050 (Pa. 1918)

259 Pa. 297

Rohrer, Appellant,

v.

Trafford Real Estate Company

No. 183

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

January 7, 1918

Argued: October 18, 1917

Appeal, No. 183, Oct. T., 1917, by plaintiff, from decree of C.P. Allegheny Co., Jan. T., 1916, No. 836, in equity, refusing relief on bill in equity to enforce building restrictions in case of Frederick F. Rohrer v. Trafford Real Estate Company, a Corporation. Affirmed.

Bill in equity to secure enforcement of building restrictions. Before EVANS, J.

The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court.

The lower court dismissed the bill. Plaintiff appealed.

Error assigned, among others, was in dismissing the bill.

The assignments of error are overruled, the decree of the court below is affirmed, and this appeal is dismissed at the cost of appellant.

U. G. Vogan, for appellant. -- The words "single dwelling house" as applied to a building restriction do not include an apartment house: Harris v. Roarback, 100 N.W. 391; Bagnall v. Young, 114 N.W. 674; Schadt v. Brill, 173 Mich. 647; Powers v. Radding, 113 N.E. 782; Brigham v. H.J. Mulock Co., 74 N.J.E. 287; Gillis v. Bailey, 21 N.H. 149; Hutchinson v. Ulrich, 145 Ill. 336.

John G. Buchanan, with him Gordon & Smith, for appellees. -- An apartment house or duplex dwelling is "a single dwelling house" within the meaning of a building restriction: St Andrew's Lutheran Church's App., 67 Pa. 512; Johnson v. Jones, 244 Pa. 386; Hamnett v. Born, 247 Pa. 418; McMurtry v. Phillips Investment Co., 103 Ky. 308; Sonn v. Heilberg, 38 A.D. 515; Kimber v. Adams, 1 Ch. 1900, 412.

Before BROWN, C.J., POTTER, MOSCHZISKER, FRAZER and WALLING, JJ.

OPINION

Page 1051

[259 Pa. 298] MR. JUSTICE POTTER:

The plaintiff purchased from the defendant a lot of ground, and, in the conveyance to him, a building restriction was inserted, which provided that but "a single dwelling house" should be erected on the lot. There was also a covenant in the deed that like restrictions should be imposed in any other conveyance of property made by defendant within the district mentioned. Conveyances of such lots were made by defendant, however, with a provision that the restriction should not be construed to prohibit the erection of a duplex dwelling or apartment house upon the lots conveyed. Claiming that a...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP