From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Strauss v. Steiner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 4, 1940
259 App. Div. 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Opinion

March 4, 1940.


From an order denying the plaintiffs' motion for an injunction pendente lite to restrain the defendants from picketing the plaintiffs' place of business, and granting a cross-motion by the defendants to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint, the plaintiffs appeal. Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to plaintiffs to serve an amended complaint within ten days from the entry of the order hereon. ( Stuhmer Co. v. Korman, 252 App. Div. 878; Lauf v. E.G. Shinner Co., 303 U.S. 323.) Certain of the statements used by those picketing the plaintiffs' premises were manifestly false, and in a proper action might be restrained. Lazansky, P.J. Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur. [ 173 Misc. 521.]


Summaries of

Strauss v. Steiner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 4, 1940
259 App. Div. 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)
Case details for

Strauss v. Steiner

Case Details

Full title:HERBERT STRAUSS and ARTHUR S. WESTERFELD, Doing Business under the Firm…

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

Date published: Mar 4, 1940

Citations

259 App. Div. 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Citing Cases

Lifshitz v. Straughn

That the plaintiffs' employees are satisfied with their lot, and that none of them wishes to become a member…