South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1922-12-13
TEST VALIDITY OF
BUILDING CODE In
INJUNCTION SUIT
Woman Arrested for Violating
Regulation Would En-
join Officials.

Resumption OF building operations
on a double-dwelLng. in the face OF
previous arrest for alleged failure
by the owner to conform TO existing
frontage lines. has presented the
city authorities with their first real
fight 20 defend the amended building
code.
Filed in Superior court No. I,
Tuesday. was an injunction suit IN
which Mrs. Goldie Horowitz seeks
restraining order against city officials
in delaying the erection Of the
dwelling, .107-109 z. Fairview av
She pleads constitutional rights 10
locate the structure 10 feet beyond
the existing building line.
NeighbOrs Complain.
Preceding the filing of the suit, a
warrant was sworn out through tie
office Of City Atty. L. w Hammond
for the re-arrest of the owner and
contractor. I. r Miller. charging
resumption Of building operations a
second and separate offense. Affect
81 property owners met with George
y. Davis. building commissioner.
and complained that the erection OF
the dOuble-house in its proposed
lines would operate TO depreciate
the value Of their properties.
City Atty. Hammond was on the
eve Of instituting an injunction suit
against Mrs. Horowitz and the con-
tractor TO stop progress on the
building when the owner got under
the wire" with her injunction plea.
The City OF South Bend Eli L. SEQ
brit. mayor. Chief OF Police Laurence
Lane. Leon r. Slaughter. Lawrence
Hardy and Albert Homer. as MEM
bers Of the Board Of Public Works,
and George A. Davis, building com
missioner, are named in the proceed
ings
Mrs. Horowitz is the wife OF
Thomas Horowitz who operates
department stores at COS and 1925
5. Michigan ST. She seeks the off,
Gals be enjoined from enforcing
Section S23 of the revised building
code, Ordinance No. 2253. to not
hinder further construction work on
the building and recover costs of
the suit
1t was made known authoritively
that the city was prepared to go the
limit in UNFOLDING the code regula-
ton.
Losing the suit, it is explained would
establish a precedent that would OF
crate materially against beautifica-
ton of the city and the best interests
OF property holders in residence sec
lions of the city. Special attention
has been given to the necessity of
such 9n ordinance by City Palmer
Bartholomew. Cities OF any size
whatever have passed such regula-
lions. he stated recently.
The provision of the building code
upon which city officials and the
owner will "go TO bat permits an
extension beyond the building line
only with a majority frontage con-
sent. 1t follows:
80 Provided further, it shall he
unlawful for any person, firm or
corporation TO hereafter locate the
building, alteration or construction
of any building for any purpose
closer to the line of any street than
the facade Of buildings on either
side Of it; this means that the near
est building in the block already
built having its street facade fur
ihermost TO the street line will be
given the first line OF the street
facade on the new building.
The word facade above used
shall be taken to mean The face or
main front wall Of a building.
The above shall not be held TO
apply if the written consent Of a ma
jority of owners has been obtain
ed"
Twice Arrested.
Violation of any provision Of the
code carries a fine not exceeding
500 for each offense. Continued
violation Of any provision constitutes
a separate onense for each and
every day such violation OF any
provision hereof may continue.
The building which the courts will
be sought to decide for or against
is already under construction, foun-
dalton i'm and uprights in place
above the si1ls. The permit to build
was obtained Nov. Z and when car
penters went on the job last week
Mrs. HOrowitz and the contractor
were served with warrants. making
them criminally liable for the under
taking. Their cases are pending oe-
fore City Judge DuComb
Co-incident with the filing OF the
injunction suit by the owner build
ing operations were again begun.
Other warrants were sworn out by
the city attorney. their arrests fol-
lowed and for the second time with
in a week they viii go before city
court for arraignment.
The cases viii probably be con
unued until the higher court dis
poses OF the suit by refusing or
granting a permanent injunction.
TAcInyR D2cfA,-