M. Kraus & Bros. v. Bergman

139 N.E.2d 132, 2 N.Y.2d 155, 157 N.Y.S.2d 947, 1956 N.Y. LEXIS 620, 39 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2177

• Court: New York Court of Appeals
• Decided: November 30, 1956
• Status: Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment appealed from should be reversed for, whether or not this be an action in equity involving a ‘ ‘ labor dispute ” and requiring findings of fact under section 876-a (subd. 1, par. [b]) of the Civil Practice'Act, there is neither proof nor finding of damage caused by the picketing (see Kane v. Walsh, 295 N. Y. 198; Wood v. O’Grady, 307 N. Y. 532). However, in view of the method of trial adopted by court and counsel for the presentation of proof, it may be that this failure of proof was inadvertent only. Therefore, we grant a new trial.

The judgment of the Appellate Division and that of Special Term should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event.

Conway, Ch. J., Desmond, Dye, Fuld, Froessel and Burke, JJ., concur in Per Curiam opinion; Van Voorhis, J., dissents and votes to affirm.

Judgments reversed, etc.