Halaby v. Denzak

Summary

The New York Appellate Division, Fourth Department, addressed enforcement of restrictive covenants governing outbuildings and fencing in a residential subdivision. The court held that the covenant did not clearly prohibit defendants from erecting an outbuilding other than the specifically listed structures, but affirmed denial of injunctive relief requiring removal of the garden fencing because the balance of equities favored defendants. The court modified the order and judgment accordingly and otherwise affirmed.

Holdings

1. The restriction did not establish that defendants were prohibited from erecting every outbuilding other than a pool cabana or architecturally compatible gazebo. Because the covenant's language excepted such structures and other structures permitted by the developer from the prohibition, plaintiff failed to prove the restriction's scope by clear and convincing evidence and was not entitled to an injunction against the proposed outbuilding.
2. Although the Uniform Plan of Restrictions unambiguously prohibited the fencing surrounding defendants' garden, plaintiff was not entitled to an injunction requiring its removal because he failed to establish that the balance of the equities favored enforcement. The defendants' lack of awareness of the restrictions, the absence of an express reference in their deed, the existence of similar fences on other lots, and the limited benefit to plaintiff supported denial of equitable relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Uniform Plan of Restrictions prohibited defendants from erecting an outbuilding other than a pool cabana or architecturally compatible gazebo.
2. Whether plaintiff was entitled to equitable relief requiring defendants to remove the fencing surrounding their garden after establishing that the fencing violated the restrictive covenant.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded