Case Name: Browning Road Realty Company, a corporation of New New Jersey, complainant-appellant, v. Brownington Realty Company et al., defendants-respondents
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1938-05-11
Citations: 123 N.J. Eq. 601
Docket Number: 
Parties: Browning Road Realty Company, a corporation of New New Jersey, complainant-appellant, v. Brownington Realty Company et al., defendants-respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Equity Reports
Volume: 123
Pages: 601–602

Head Matter:
Browning Road Realty Company, a corporation of New New Jersey, complainant-appellant, v. Brownington Realty Company et al., defendants-respondents.
[Argued February 9th, 1938.
Decided May 11th, 1938.]
Messrs. Heine <& Heine, for the complainant-appellant.
Mr. Joseph Varbalow (Mr. Harry Grossman, of counsel), for the defendant-respondent Hyman Varbalow Building and Loan Association.

Opinion:
Pee Cubiam.
This is an appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Davis, dismissing a bill of complaint filed under the provisions of P. L. 1909 ch. 157 p. £33. Rev. Stat. £-.7.6-38 to £:76-J±5.
The complainant is the owner of a number of lots in the township of Pennsauken, county of Camden, which, with other lots, were originally conveyed subject to certain building restrictions. By proceedings under the statute it was sought to have the restrictions declared non-existent and invalid, either because of the failure to create a neighborhood scheme or because of an abandonment thereof through continued violations of the restrictions.
Upon examination of the pleadings and proofs in the canse' we are of the opinion that the bill of complaint was properly dismissed.
The.decree is affirmed.
For affirmance — Parker, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Baeeérty, Walker, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.