Beisner v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Beisner v. Kelly

15 A.D.2d 527, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7089

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 18, 1961·Published

Opinion

No opinion. Beldock, Kleinfeld and Pette, JJ., concur; Nolan, P. J., and Christ, J., concur in affirmance insofar as it holds: (1) that the State court has jurisdiction to determine the issues raised (cf. Lavery’s Main St. Grill v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees-Bartenders Union Local 288, 146 Conn. 93), and (2) that wrongful or unlawful picketing should be enjoined; but otherwise dissent from the affirmance on the ground that under the circumstances here the injunctive provisions of the judgment are too broad, and vote to modify the judgment so as to permit peaceful picketing for any lawful objective (Teamsters Union v. Vogt, Inc., 354 U. S. 284; Cafeteria Union v. Angelos, 320 U. S. 293; Pennock Co. v. Ferretti, 283 App. Div. 527).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

No opinion. Beldock, Kleinfeld and Pette, JJ., concur; Nolan, P. J., and Christ, J., concur in affirmance insofar as it holds: (1) that the State court has jurisdiction to determine the issues raised (cf. Lavery’s Main St. Grill v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees-Bartenders Union Local 288, 146 Conn. 93), and (2) that wrongful or unlawful picketing should be enjoined; but otherwise dissent from the affirmance on the ground that under the circumstances here the injunctive provisions of the judgment are too broad, and vote to modify the judgment so as to permit peaceful picketing for any lawful objective (Teamsters Union v. Vogt, Inc., 354 U. S. 284; Cafeteria Union v. Angelos, 320 U. S. 293; Pennock Co. v. Ferretti, 283 App. Div. 527).

Beisner v. Kelly, 15 A.D.2d 527, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7089 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

15 A.D.2d 527 (Beisner v. Kelly) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related