Case Name: 40th Street and Park Avenue, Inc., Appellant, v. Austin G. Fox, Respondent, Impleaded with Others
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1928-05-01
Citations: 248 N.Y. 527
Docket Number: 
Parties: 40th Street and Park Avenue, Inc., Appellant, v. Austin G. Fox, Respondent, Impleaded with Others.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 248
Pages: 527–528

Head Matter:
40th Street and Park Avenue, Inc., Appellant, v. Austin G. Fox, Respondent, Impleaded with Others.
(Argued April 4, 1928;
decided May 1, 1928.)
Charles L. Craig for appellant.
George Zabriskie and Charles M. Kritzman for respondent.

Opinion:
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.