, 1903-06-17
RESTRAINING ORDER DISSOLVED.

On Monday IN Camden before vice
Chancellor Grey the case of John N.
Harrigan, defendant, was heard. A tenn
porary injunction had previously been
served on Mrs. Harrigan to prevent a con-
%tinuation of the work of remodelling the
Togwatton Cottage at Wildwood. This
cottage was formerly owned by Mrs. Har-
riet S. Quirnby but recently purchased
by Mrs. Harrigan, who has raised 1t and
is building basement stores under it. 1t
was alleged that an extension is being
made ten feet over the building line, in
violation of the original deed given for
t ert Let bXu Raker Rms; aia as Az nreps
1t was sod Jation Of
the specify Re deedU prevent
rtrrr1er on the Togwatton I'M
der the p~reser5Splans.
Judge Harrison H. Voorhees, appeared
as counsel for Mr.. Reeve and ex-Judge
Howard Carrow for Mrs. H%arrigan.
In the reply iIubmitted by Mrs. Harri-
gan's counsel it was held that the build
ing was completed with slight exceptions
before the Injunction was served but
Judge Voorhees, claimed that this was
not altogether true, as notices had been
served on the defendant before THE Court
granted the restraining order stopping
the work.
Mrs. Harrigan claimed that the deed
which she received contained no restrain
'AS oPA0A " oAo iAtI ' Nhb
That she had no knowledge whatever of
any deed restrictions until June 2, 1903,
after the building was practically com
pleted. That other property owners had
built over the line in question n that
the complainant himself had property
with an extension of four feet over the
said building line, and that many other
properties have such extensions, and that
the specifications in the deeds have been
VIGOROUSLY violated without objection
from the authorities or other interested
property owners. 1t was alleged that
Edgeton Inn is one of the buildings
which for 100 feet is built out to the
street line.
DIR. H%arrigan, husband of Mrs. Harri-
"a had presented a long affidavit citing
the inconvenience to which he n his
wife were being put by the complaint,
that two of the new stores were rented
and that they would be deferred from
moving into the house unless the restrain
ing order be dissolved.
Affidavits of Robert Wright, the
builder, l.. NJ. Rice, Borough Engineer.
and DIR. Slaughter were presented to prove
that Mr.. Reeve, the complainant, was
himself a y~iolator of the building line
restriction, n that he had deferred
making the complaint until the improve
ments to the Togwatton were practically
completed, and that others had violated
the restriction without hindrance.
Judge Voorhees, insisted that notice
had been served OF Mrs. Harrigan early
in May although DIR. Harrigan's affidavit
stated that June 2 was the date of
service of the first notice. Judge Voor-
hees stated that bay windows had been
permitted to extend over the building
line in Wildwood but that in the interest
of keeping the buildings on a uniform line
no one should be permitted to violate
the restriction by building from the base
over the line.
The Vice Chancellor seemed to take the
view hat Mr.. Reeve had violated the re-
striction and was partially estopped from
an action against another violator and he
dissolved the restraining order with costs
to the complainant with the remark that
the defendant would finish her building
at her own risk if a suit at law should
be brought against her and tried on its
merits.
The decision does not give any person
the right to build over the restricted line
but simply refuses to prohibit the COM
pletion of the work on the Togwatton
by a permanent injunction, at this stage
of the proceedings.
Among the questions involved should
this case come before the courts in the
regular way is that of the absence of the
building line stipulation in the deed
from Quimby to Harrigan, n whether
by allowing others to violate the ~restric-
tion heretofore by building bay windows
or other extensions, the public has
forfeited the remedy which might have
been enforced If proper steps had been
taken against the first %violators.
In most suits at law the violation of a
law or restrictions by one person will not
serve as a permission to others to do
likewise, but where erected buildings