Windsor Diner, Inc. v. Dalles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Windsor Diner, Inc. v. Dalles

2 A.D.2d 759, 153 N.Y.S.2d 609, 38 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2565, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4812

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

DecidedJuly 2, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 2 A.D.2d 759 (Windsor Diner, Inc. v. Dalles) 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

Windsor Diner, Inc. v. Dalles, 2 A.D.2d 759, 153 N.Y.S.2d 609, 38 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2565, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4812 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for an injunction and for other relief, the appeal is from an order restraining appellants, during the pendency of the action, from picketing respondent’s place of business and from otherwise interfering with its business. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Wenzel, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur. Beldoek, J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and to remit the application to Special Term for further proceedings as indicated herein, with the following memorandum: On April 18, 1956 respondent, not yet having opened its place of business and having no employees (or perhaps one or two), although knowing that it required approximately 15 employees to run its business, entered into a closed-shop contract with U. S. E. Local 377, C.I.O. Appellant Local 325 began to picket respondent’s place of business claiming that the contract of April 18, 1956 with Local 377 was illegal in that respondent’s employees had not freely selected Local 377 to be their collective bargaining representative, but that, on the contrary, said employees were coerced by respondent to join Local 377 as a condition of employment. Before an injunction may issue against picketing by Local 325, the validity of the contract of April 18, 1956 must first be determined. Such a determination should be made only after a hearing and not on the affidavits. [See post, p. 813.]

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

In an action for an injunction and for other relief, the appeal is from an order restraining appellants, during the pendency of the action, from picketing respondent’s place of business and from otherwise interfering with its business. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Wenzel, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur. Beldoek, J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and to remit the application to Special Term for further proceedings as indicated herein, with the following memorandum: On April 18, 1956 respondent, not yet having opened its place of business and having no employees (or perhaps one or two), although knowing that it required approximately 15 employees to run its business, entered into a closed-shop contract with U. S. E. Local 377, C.I.O. Appellant Local 325 began to picket respondent’s place of business claiming that the contract of April 18, 1956 with Local 377 was illegal in that respondent’s employees had not freely selected Local 377 to be their collective bargaining representative, but that, on the contrary, said employees were coerced by respondent to join Local 377 as a condition of employment. Before an injunction may issue against picketing by Local 325, the validity of the contract of April 18, 1956 must first be determined. Such a determination should be made only after a hearing and not on the affidavits. [See post, p. 813.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 A.D.2d 759, 153 N.Y.S.2d 609, 38 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2565, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/windsor-diner-inc-v-dalles-nyappdiv-1956.