Legal Opinion

Hoffman v. Parker

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 24, 1913No. Appeal, No. 344PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal, No. 344, Jan. T., 1912, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1912, No. 4867, dismissing exceptions to adjudication in case of Benjamin R. Hoffman, Jacob Hoffman and Bernard MaeMackin v. Raymond M. Parker and Elizabeth McGonigle. Bill in equity to restrain the violation of building restrictions.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 344, Jan. T., 1912, by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1912, No. 4867, dismissing exceptions to adjudication in case of Benjamin R. Hoffman, Jacob Hoffman and Bernard MaeMackin v. Raymond M. Parker and Elizabeth McGonigle. Bill in equity to restrain the violation of building restrictions. Ferguson, J., filed the following opinion: The question involved in this case is whether or not a restriction imposed upon land prohibiting the erection of any building or buildings other than dwellings, apartment or flat houses, churches, schools or private…

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The decree dismissing the plaintiffs’ bills is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Ferguson.

2Cited by13 opinions

  1. Moore v. StevensSupreme Court of Florida · 1925
  2. Jones v. Park Lane for Convalescents, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  3. Pehlert Et Ux. v. Neff Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  4. Kauffman v. DishlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  5. Hunter Tract Improvement Co. v. Corporation of the Catholic BishopWashington Supreme Court · 1917

8 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