From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Canepa v. "John Doe"

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 18, 1938
12 N.E.2d 790 (N.Y. 1938)

Opinion

Argued January 4, 1938

Decided January 18, 1938

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

Louis Waldman and David I. Ashe for appellants. Sidney O. Raphael for respondent.


The complaint sufficiently alleges that the picketing by the defendants is part of a true secondary boycott and an unlawful interference with the business of the plaintiff ( Goldfinger v. Feintuch, 276 N.Y. 281.) Whether or not the case is one "involving or growing out of a labor dispute" as these terms are defined by section 876-a of the Civil Practice Act, the complaint is sufficient.

The order should be affirmed, without costs. The first question certified is not answered and the second question is answered in the affirmative.

CRANE, Ch. J., LEHMAN, O'BRIEN, LOUGHRAN, FINCH and RIPPEY, JJ., concur; HUBBS, J., taking no part.

Order affirmed, etc.


Summaries of

Canepa v. "John Doe"

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 18, 1938
12 N.E.2d 790 (N.Y. 1938)
Case details for

Canepa v. "John Doe"

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH CANEPA, Respondent, v. "JOHN DOE," as President of SHEET METAL…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jan 18, 1938

Citations

12 N.E.2d 790 (N.Y. 1938)
12 N.E.2d 790

Citing Cases

Weil & Co. v. “John Doe”

( Goldfinger v. Feintuch, supra, p. 286.) In Canepa v. "Doe" ( 277 N.Y. 52), a decision more recent than the…

People v. Muller

(Cf. People v. Bellows, 281 N.Y. 67; Canepa v. "John Doe," 277 N.Y.…