De Candido v. Young Stars, Inc.

10 A.D.2d 922, 200 N.Y.S.2d 695, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9883
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 17, 1960·Published·Cited by 15 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed on the law, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, with $2.0 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motion for a temporary injunction is denied, with $10 costs. The plaintiff has not made the requisite showing to establish that he has a clear legal right to the injunction sought. A temporary injunction should not be granted unless the plaintiff shows a clear legal right thereto and, in addition, shows that he would be irreparably damaged if an injunction were not granted before trial. The defenses of unclean hands, loches, and the absence of the maintenance of a fair-trade price structure in the vicinity where it is sought to be enforced are strongly supported by defendant’s affidavits and preclude the granting of a temporary injunction. Moreover, it appears that the defendant, to the knowledge of the plaintiff, had been selling merchandise below fair-trade prices openly for more than two years before this action was commenced. In such circumstances the plaintiff should not be granted an injunction before the issues are tried. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, M. M. Frank, Stevens and Bastow, JJ.

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

De Candido v. Young Stars, Inc., 10 A.D.2d 922, 200 N.Y.S.2d 695, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9883 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

10 A.D.2d 922 (De Candido v. Young Stars, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United for Peace & Justice v. Bloomberg
5 Misc. 3d 845 (New York Supreme Court, 2004)
Modern Telecommunications, Inc. v. Zimmerman
140 A.D.2d 217 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Kaufman v. Axelrod
135 Misc. 2d 293 (New York Supreme Court, 1987)
Armbruster v. Gipp
103 A.D.2d 1014 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Little India Stores, Inc. v. Singh
101 A.D.2d 727 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Umpiere v. New York University
72 A.D.2d 507 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Paine v. Blair House Associates
70 A.D.2d 571 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Village of Honeoye Falls v. Elmer
69 A.D.2d 1010 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Chrysler Corp. v. Fedders Corp.
63 A.D.2d 567 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)
Bryant Westchester Realty Corp. v. Board of Health
91 Misc. 2d 56 (New York Supreme Court, 1977)
Multi Media Entertainment, Inc. v. National Telefilm Associates., Inc.
58 A.D.2d 785 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)
State v. Manhattan Transit Co.
58 A.D.2d 758 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)
In re Archer
89 Misc. 2d 526 (NYC Family Court, 1977)
DeLury v. City of New York
48 A.D.2d 595 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1975)
Parke, Davis & Company v. Jarvis Drug Co.
208 F. Supp. 350 (S.D. New York, 1962)