Homann v. O'Grady

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Homann v. O'Grady

6 A.D.2d 872, 177 N.Y.S.2d 596

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

DecidedJuly 8, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 6 A.D.2d 872 (Homann v. O'Grady) 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

Homann v. O'Grady, 6 A.D.2d 872, 177 N.Y.S.2d 596 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to enjoin, inter alia, the picketing of a place of business, the appeal is from an order granting a motion for an injunction pendente lite. Order reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to the Special Term for a hearing as to whether the injunction should issue. The affidavit of the union organizer denied that he had ever demanded that respondent, the employer, sign a union contract. An issue of fact as to the existence of a labor dispute exists which cannot be determined without a hearing. (Wood v. O’Grady, 307 N. Y. 532; Palermo v. Motto, 283 App. Div. 746.) Nolan, P. J., Murphy, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur; Wenzel, J., dissents and votes to affirm the order on the opinion of the court at Special Term. (11 Misc 2d 592.)

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

In an action to enjoin, inter alia, the picketing of a place of business, the appeal is from an order granting a motion for an injunction pendente lite. Order reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to the Special Term for a hearing as to whether the injunction should issue. The affidavit of the union organizer denied that he had ever demanded that respondent, the employer, sign a union contract. An issue of fact as to the existence of a labor dispute exists which cannot be determined without a hearing. (Wood v. O’Grady, 307 N. Y. 532; Palermo v. Motto, 283 App. Div. 746.) Nolan, P. J., Murphy, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur; Wenzel, J., dissents and votes to affirm the order on the opinion of the court at Special Term. (11 Misc 2d 592.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.2d 872, 177 N.Y.S.2d 596, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/homann-v-ogrady-nyappdiv-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack