United Cigar Stores Co. of America v. Dell Publishing Co.

New York Supreme Court

United Cigar Stores Co. of America v. Dell Publishing Co.

143 Misc. 420, 255 N.Y.S. 712, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1398

DecidedJanuary 22, 1932

StatusPublished

This text of 143 Misc. 420 (United Cigar Stores Co. of America v. Dell Publishing Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United Cigar Stores Co. of America v. Dell Publishing Co., 143 Misc. 420, 255 N.Y.S. 712, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1398 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Lydon, J.

I think the complaint probably states a cause of action to restrain an unlawful conspiracy, but upon a consideration of the affidavits I am of the opinion that sufficient answer is made to the charge. The case appears to me to be one where the publisher of a magazine, as a matter of business policy, has decided not to sell the publication to plaintiff. It is not a case where publishers or dealers have entered into an agreement or arrangement with one another to create a monopoly or restrain competition. It is a case where a particular publisher has decided that it does not wish to do business with a particular purchaser and has instructed its agent to refuse to make sales to that purchaser. The newsdealers’ associations which are made parties defendant appear to have made [421]*421representations and objections concerning the sale of the magazine to plaintiff, which they had a perfect right to do, but there is nothing to justify the claim that they became parties to any agreement, arrangement or conspiracy.

The motion for an injunction and the cross-motion to dismiss the complaint will, therefore, be denied.

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

Lydon, J.

I think the complaint probably states a cause of action to restrain an unlawful conspiracy, but upon a consideration of the affidavits I am of the opinion that sufficient answer is made to the charge. The case appears to me to be one where the publisher of a magazine, as a matter of business policy, has decided not to sell the publication to plaintiff. It is not a case where publishers or dealers have entered into an agreement or arrangement with one another to create a monopoly or restrain competition. It is a case where a particular publisher has decided that it does not wish to do business with a particular purchaser and has instructed its agent to refuse to make sales to that purchaser. The newsdealers’ associations which are made parties defendant appear to have made [421]*421representations and objections concerning the sale of the magazine to plaintiff, which they had a perfect right to do, but there is nothing to justify the claim that they became parties to any agreement, arrangement or conspiracy.

The motion for an injunction and the cross-motion to dismiss the complaint will, therefore, be denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 Misc. 420, 255 N.Y.S. 712, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-cigar-stores-co-of-america-v-dell-publishing-co-nysupct-1932.