Legal Opinion

Bright v. Forest Hill Park Development Co.

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided March 31, 1943No. Docket 139/589PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The prayer of the bill of complaint is that the defendants be enjoined from constructing thirty-two duplex apartment houses on a triangular city block of land in the City of Camden bounded by Bradley Avenue, Euclid Avenue and Park Boulevard. Complainants allege that the construction of other than detached, single-family dwellings in this triangular block and the adjoining quadrangular block across Bradley Avenue is prohibited by a neighborhood scheme of restriction. No application for adinterim restraint was made by complainants and at the time of final hearing the thirty-two apartment houses…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. The Venus, Rae, MasterSupreme Court of the United States · 1814
  2. Scull v. EilenbergSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1923
  3. Morrow v. HasselmanNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1905
  4. Fortesque v. CarrollSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1910
  5. De Gray v. Monmouth Beach Club House Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1892

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Toll Bros., Inc. v. Township of ReadingtonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
  2. Dyegard Land Partnership v. HooverCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2001
  3. Matthews v. Kernewood, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1945
  4. Flamingo Ranch Est., Inc. v. Sunshine Ranches H., Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1974
  5. Wright v. Cypress Shores Development Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1982

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API