1. A purchaser's rights in the erection of a building on the land purchased are not to be judged from the deed of conveyance alone, but also from any building restrictions contained in any previously recorded deeds affecting the title.
2. The complainant, a subsequent purchaser, had no greater rights relative to the enforcement of building restrictions against the adjoining owner than its grantor, unless it called the attention of the adjoining owner to the restrictions before the work on the building had progressed too far.
3. The failure of the complainant, the owner of property adjoining that which had building restrictions on it in accordance with a certain drawing, to exhibit the drawing which was in its possession and was the sole copy in existence, to those building an apartment house next door until after the third story had been completed, where the complainant believed that the building was not being constructed according to the drawing after it had been raised up to the first story windows, is fatal to injunctive relief now.
4. An apartment house of the same height above street grade, depth, width, character, style and color of brick, and having the same ornamental stonework and exterior materials as the adjoining building, constitutes a "twin building" to that structure, as defined in a restrictive covenant, in that "twin buildings" means separate buildings similar in exterior construction and appearance.
PER CURIAM.
The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Fielder.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, KALISCH, KATZENBACH, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, WHITE, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.