Opinion
March 21, 1935.
Appeal from the Municipal Court of New York, Borough of Manhattan, Tenth District.
Walter J. Ryan, for the appellant.
William T. Andrews [ John H. Lewis of counsel], for the respondent.
A beauty parlor is not specifically mentioned in the Civil Rights Law, sections 40, 41, and is not a place of public accommodation under the common law or under the general terms of the statute. ( Burks v. Bosso, 180 N.Y. 341; Gibbs v. Arras Brothers, 222 id. 332; Faulkner v. Solazzi, 79 Conn. 541; 65 A. 947.) Where it is not conducted as part of a barber shop a beauty parlor is not included in that term as used in the statute.
Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and complaint dismissed on the merits, with costs.
All concur; present, LYDON, HAMMER and FRANKENTHALER, JJ.