From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rosekay Amusement Corp. v. Holmden

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 24, 1934
243 App. Div. 82 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)

Opinion

December 24, 1934.

Appeal from Supreme Court of New York County.

Jeremiah T. Mahoney of counsel [ N. Taylor Phillips with him on the brief; Phillips, Mahoney, Leibell Fielding, attorneys], for the appellants.

Melvin A. Albert of counsel [ Milton C. Weisman with him on the brief; Weisman, Quinn, Allan Spett, attorneys], for the respondent.

Present — FINCH, P.J., MERRELL, MARTIN, O'MALLEY and UNTERMYER, JJ.; FINCH, P.J., dissents and votes for modification.


For the reasons stated in Bert Amusement Corp. v. Holmden ( 243 App. Div. 81), decided herewith, the order should be affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements.


For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in Bert Amusement Corp. v. Holmden ( 243 App. Div. 81), decided herewith, the order appealed from should be modified by permitting peaceful picketing by at least two pickets and an immediate trial should be had of the action, and as so modified affirmed.

Order affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements.


Summaries of

Rosekay Amusement Corp. v. Holmden

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 24, 1934
243 App. Div. 82 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)
Case details for

Rosekay Amusement Corp. v. Holmden

Case Details

Full title:ROSEKAY AMUSEMENT CORPORATION, Respondent, v. HARRY HOLMDEN, Individually…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 24, 1934

Citations

243 App. Div. 82 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)
276 N.Y.S. 238