Hydrox Ice Cream Co. v. Doe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hydrox Ice Cream Co. v. Doe

250 A.D. 770, 293 N.Y.S. 1013, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8927

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

DecidedMarch 12, 1937

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 250 A.D. 770 (Hydrox Ice Cream Co. v. Doe) 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

Hydrox Ice Cream Co. v. Doe, 250 A.D. 770, 293 N.Y.S. 1013, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8927 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Action for a permanent injunction restraining defendants from picketing the places of business of plaintiff’s customers. Order denying plaintiff’s motion for an injunction pendente lite, without prejudice, and granting defendants’ cross-motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to' constitute [771]*771a cause of action, with leave to serve an amended complaint, affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements; the amended complaint to be served within ten days from the entry of the order hereon. We are of opinion that this is a ease involving and growing out of a labor dispute within the provisions of section 876-a, subdivision 10, of the Civil Practice Act, and the plaintiff cannot obtain relief without complying with that section. To the extent indicated, there is no deprivation of the court’s jurisdiction. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Davis and Adel, JJ., concur.

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

Action for a permanent injunction restraining defendants from picketing the places of business of plaintiff’s customers. Order denying plaintiff’s motion for an injunction pendente lite, without prejudice, and granting defendants’ cross-motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to' constitute [771]*771a cause of action, with leave to serve an amended complaint, affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements; the amended complaint to be served within ten days from the entry of the order hereon. We are of opinion that this is a ease involving and growing out of a labor dispute within the provisions of section 876-a, subdivision 10, of the Civil Practice Act, and the plaintiff cannot obtain relief without complying with that section. To the extent indicated, there is no deprivation of the court’s jurisdiction. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Davis and Adel, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D. 770, 293 N.Y.S. 1013, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8927, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hydrox-ice-cream-co-v-doe-nyappdiv-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack