Bach v. Grabfelder
This text of 233 A.D. 773 (Bach v. Grabfelder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. If we were to limit the non-enforcibility of the restrictions as against the defendant alone it would not be decisive of the situation disclosed by this record. Whether the restrictions upon plaintiff’s property can be enforced by owners of other lots in the tract in question should not be determined in an action seeking a judgment declaratory against such other owners in their absence. They have a right to be heard on the question of the enforcibility of the restrictions. Jurisdiction in an action for a declaratory [774]*774judgment is discretionary. (Bareham v. City of Rochester, 246 N. Y. 140, 143.) A consideration of the facts presented satisfies us that the conclusion reached by the Special Term should be upheld. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
233 A.D. 773, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bach-v-grabfelder-nyappdiv-1931.