40th Street & Park Avenue, Inc. v. Fox, 162 N.E. 511 (N.Y. 1928). · Go Syfert
40th Street & Park Avenue, Inc. v. Fox, 162 N.E. 511 (N.Y. 1928). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Cited for

No citing cases on record.

40th Street and Park Avenue, Inc., Appellant,
v.
Austin G. Fox, Respondent, Impleaded With Others
New York Court of Appeals.
May 1, 1928.
Published opinion
162 N.E. 511
1928 N.Y. LEXIS 1322
Charles L. Craig for appellant. George Zabriskie and Charles M. Kritzman for respondent.
<italic>Per Curiam.</italic>.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
Per Curiam.

Future changes in the character of the neighborhood as now maintained by law and usage may make it inequitable hereafter to enforce the covenant in suit. We deal only with conditions as they existed at the trial. The question whether the Princeton Club has disabled itself, by a breach of the covenant, from enforcing the restriction is not raised by an appropriate exception and is not before us on this appeal.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Andrews, Lehman, Kellogg and O'Brien, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.