From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Woodmere Park Ass'n, Inc. v. Cedarpoint Realty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 19, 1951
279 AD 672 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)

Opinion


279 A.D. 672 108 N.Y.S.2d 38 WOODMERE PARK ASSOCIATION, INC., et al., Suing on Behalf of Themselves and on Behalf of All Other Resident Property Owners of WOODMERE PARK, WOODMERE, NEW YORK, Similarly Situated, Appellants, v. CEDARPOINT REALTY CO., INC., et al., Respondents. Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. November 19, 1951

         In an action to enjoin the erection of stores on land nearby appellants' homes, on the ground that such use of the land is prohibited under a declaration filed by a developer, and on the ground that oral representations, and reliance thereon, equitably estop respondents from erecting the stores, judgment entered in favor of respondents on the merits, after trial by the court without a jury, unanimously affirmed, with costs. We interpret the declaration as not imposing a restriction in use of the three-acre parcel in suit; and hold that testimony, as to oral representations and reliance thereon, is incompetent under the provisions in the written contracts, even assuming that the witnesses were not incompetent to testify under section 347 of the Civil Practice Act.

         Present--Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ. [[See 279 A.D. 801.]

Summaries of

Woodmere Park Ass'n, Inc. v. Cedarpoint Realty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 19, 1951
279 AD 672 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)
Case details for

Woodmere Park Ass'n, Inc. v. Cedarpoint Realty Co.

Case Details

Full title:WOODMERE PARK ASSOCIATION, INC., et al., Suing on Behalf of Themselves and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 19, 1951

Citations

279 AD 672 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)
279 App. Div. 672
108 N.Y.S.2d 38

Citing Cases

M.N.S. Brandell v. Roosevelt Nassau Operating

An easement by representation may be established by extrinsic evidence notwithstanding a general merger…

Lemkin v. Gulde

An easement by representation may be established by extrinsic evidence notwithstanding a general merger…