Hyperlawhypertext legal database Grossman v. Consolidated Gas Co. 100 N.Y.S. 100

← Cases

Grossman v. Consolidated Gas Co.

100 N.Y.S. 100 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1906-06-20 English

Decision Majority — LAUGHLIN, J. · Dissent — McLAUGHLIN, J.

Contents
p. 100
(114 App. Div. 242.)
GROSSMAN v. CONSOLIDATED GAS CO. OF NEW YORK.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
June 20, 1906.)

Headnote

Appeal from Special Term, New York County.
Action by Alexander R. Grossman against the Consolidated Gas Company of New York. From an order granting an injunction pendente lite, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Argued before O’BRIEN, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, PATTERSON, LAUGHLIN, and HOUGHTON, JJ.
John F. Dillon and John A. Garver, for appellant.
Clarence J. Shearn, for respondent.

The facts in this case present similar questions to those discussed in the opinion in Richman v. Consolidated Gas Co. (argued and decided herewith) 100 N. Y. S. 81 . In this case, however, with the same justice presiding, the motion for an injunction was granted, which is doubtless accounted for by the fact that the opinion of the learned circuit judge of the United States, construing the restraining order theretofore granted in the suit instituted in the federal court by the defendant, was filed in the meantime.

It follows that the order should be affirmed upon the prevailing opinion in the Richman Case, with $10 costs and disbursements.

O’BRIEN, P. J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.

(dissenting). The order here appealed from should be reversed, and the motion to continue the injunction denied, on the second ground stated in my opinion in Richman v. Consolidated Gas Co. (decided herewith) 100 N. Y. S. 81 , for an affirmance of the order there appealed from.

HOUGHTON, J., concurs.

Cases cited