Coates v. Young Women's Christian Ass'n

Citations

• 245 Pa. 426
• 91 A. 863
• 1914 Pa. LEXIS 892

Syllabus

<p>Equity — Building restrictions — Injunction—Laches.</p> <p>1. In a suit in equity to restrain the erection of a building, in violation of a building restriction prohibiting the erection of houses fronting upon a certain street, the plaintiffs were properly held to be precluded by laches where it appeared that defendant let a contract for the erection of a building fronting on the street on the 18th of September, 1913; that it was to cost $19,281; that its construction was begun shortly thereafter, and that all persons passing the building after the last of September could, see that its front was upon the prohibited street, and that the work was steadily progressing thereon; that the action was brought by three plaintiffs who owned land in the vicinity, for the benefit of which the restriction was made, in order to secure a free circulation of light and air, and one of the plaintiffs knew of the intention to erect the building in September, and that the work was being done after the first week in October; while another of the plaintiffs knew about the same time that the work was going on, and the third knew of it about a week later; that no objection was made to the erection of the building until November 8, 1913, and no notice was given to the builder until November 11, 1913, at which time the building was largely completed, and substantially all the subcontracts had been let.</p> <p>2. In such case where a restriction prohibiting the erection of buildings fronting on a certain street had been first made more than seventy years before, and substantially all of the ground covered by the restriction was occupied, by buildings in violation thereof, to which it did not appear that any objection had ever been made, the case- is not one involving the deliberate violation of a building restriction, after notice, and under such circumstances defendants might well have believed that the old restriction would not be insisted upon.</p> <p>Practice, Supreme Court — Assignmen