Opinion
January 17, 1940.
March 25, 1940.
Zoning — Motion picture theatre — Stores — Dwelling — Evidence.
On appeal by plaintiffs from the decision of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, allowing the erection of a moving picture theatre and stores it was held that the lower court did not commit error in deciding that the contemplated uses of the property were lawful and not in derogation of plaintiffs' rights.
Argued January 17, 1940.
Before SCHAFFER, C. J., MAXEY, DREW, LINN, STERN, BARNES and PATTERSON, JJ.
Appeal, No. 402, Jan. T., 1939, from decree of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., March T., 1939, No. 1715 (certified from Superior Court, Oct. T., 1939, No. 343), in case of Frank B. Todd, Jr., et ux. v. Martin J. McLaughlin et al. Decree affirmed.
Appeal to common pleas from decision of Zoning Board of Adjustment. Before HEILIGMAN, J.
Exceptions to findings and conclusions of trial judge dismissed, opinion per curiam, and final decree entered dismissing appeal. Plaintiffs appealed.
Errors assgined, among others, related to the action of the court in sustaining findings and conclusions of the trial judge.
William S. Fenerty, for appellants.
G. Coe Farrier, Assistant City Solicitor, and Francis F. Burch, City Solicitor, for appellee, were not heard.
Samuel D. Goodis, Sundheim, Folz Hirsch and A. Balfour Brehman, of Gilfillan, Gilpin Brehman, for appellees, were not heard.
This is an appeal by plaintiffs from the decision of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. The purpose of appellants is to prevent the erection of a moving picture theatre and stores upon the land in question, which is located across the street from their dwelling. The court below, much more familiar with the situation than we could be, after hearing the testimony and visiting the locality, dismissed the appeal and concluded that the contemplated uses of the property were lawful and not in derogation of plaintiffs' rights. We are not convinced that there was error in so deciding.
Decree affirmed at appellants' cost.