Wilner v. Bless
New York Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
On the facts as found the signs carried
and circulars distributed by members of defendant’s local did not honestly or fairly state the nature of the labor dispute between the plaintiff and the local; i. e., that plaintiff had refused to renew his contract to employ only members of the defendant’s local; that he had made an agreement with another labor organization to employ its members only for one year and that the term of the contract between plaintiff and defendant’s local had expired.
As the purpose of the dissemination of the false or misleading information was to injure plaintiff’s…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Nann v. RaimistNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Montgomery Ward & Co. v. United Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Employees of AmericaIllinois Supreme Court · 1948
- Magill Bros. v. Building Service Employees' International UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- West Willow Realty Corp. v. TaylorNew York Supreme Court · 1960
- A. S. Beck Shoe Corp. v. JohnsonNew York Supreme Court · 1934
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.