Hamlen v. Werner

Decided May 7, 1887

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1887-05-07

Bill in equity, filed August 22, 1885, against Honora Werner and Charles O. Hunter, to restrain the erection of a building in violation of the provisions of a deed, and to compel its removal.

Relies on Peck v. Conway · Linzee v. Mixer · Sanborn v. Rice

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1887-05-07

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 1993

2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

W. Allen, J.

¶1The condition that “the front line of the building which may be erected on the said lot shall be placed on a line parallel with, and ten feet back from, the said Tremont Street,” is a valid restriction, which the plaintiff can enforce. Sanborn v. Rice, 129 Mass. 387. Bagnall v. Davies, 140 Mass. 76. Linzee v. Mixer, 101 Mass. 512. Peck v. Conway, 119 Mass. 546.

¶2The words “ for the term of twenty years from the first day of June, A. D. 1860,” in the fifth condition, are limited to that, and do not apply to the second, upon which the plaintiff relies. Keening v. Ayling, 126 Mass. 404.

¶3There can be no question that the defendants’ building is prohibited by the restriction. Decree affirmed.