Borden v. Adams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Borden v. Adams

7 A.D.2d 715, 180 N.Y.S.2d 107, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3933

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 9, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 7 A.D.2d 715 (Borden v. Adams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Borden v. Adams, 7 A.D.2d 715, 180 N.Y.S.2d 107, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3933 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Order appealed from reversed upon the facts and in the exercise of discretion and motion denied, without costs. Upon the facts here presented the defendants-respondents before seeking relief from Special Term should have applied to the United States District Court to restrain the prosecution of the action pending therein. We do not pass upon the power of Special Term to act or determine whether it had proper jurisdiction of the nonresident individuals so restrained. In view of the geographical closeness of the two courts, and with due regard to the general rules of comity, a proper exercise of discretion requires that the initial application for injunctive relief should be made to the Federal tribunal. Concur—Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, M. M. Frank and Bastow, JJ.

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

Order appealed from reversed upon the facts and in the exercise of discretion and motion denied, without costs. Upon the facts here presented the defendants-respondents before seeking relief from Special Term should have applied to the United States District Court to restrain the prosecution of the action pending therein. We do not pass upon the power of Special Term to act or determine whether it had proper jurisdiction of the nonresident individuals so restrained. In view of the geographical closeness of the two courts, and with due regard to the general rules of comity, a proper exercise of discretion requires that the initial application for injunctive relief should be made to the Federal tribunal. Concur—Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, M. M. Frank and Bastow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 A.D.2d 715, 180 N.Y.S.2d 107, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/borden-v-adams-nyappdiv-1958.