Opinion
Submitted September 21, 1999
December 20, 1999
In an action to enforce a restrictive covenant in a deed, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Williams, J.H.O.), dated June 25, 1998, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the defendants and against him, dismissing the complaint.
Bloom Bloom, P.C., New Windsor, N.Y. (Daniel J. Bloom of counsel), for appellant.
Marcia A. Jacobowitz, Walden, N.Y., for respondents.
SONDRA MILLER, J.P., DANIEL W. JOY, ANITA R. FLORIO and HOWARD MILLER, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the Supreme Court's determination that the restrictive covenant encumbering the defendants' property is ambiguous. When a restrictive covenant is ambiguous, public policy favors the free and unobstructed use of the property, and the covenant cannot be enforced (see, Bear Mtn. Books v. Woodbury Common Partners, 232 A.D.2d 595 ; see also, Freedman v. Kittle, 262 A.D.2d 909 [3d Dept., June 24, 1999]).
The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.
S. MILLER, J.P., JOY, FLORIO, and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.