City of New York v. M. Wineburgh Advertising Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, the M. Wineburgh Advertising Company, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the-New York ’ Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 16th day of September,' 1907, granting the plaintiff’s motion to continue a temporary injunction pendente lite.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant, the M. Wineburgh Advertising Company, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the-New York ’ Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 16th day of September,' 1907, granting the plaintiff’s motion to continue a temporary injunction pendente lite. This is an action in equity by the City of New York to restrain the construction by defendant of what,is denominated as a “sky sign,” erected upon the roof of a building in the city, and to compel the removal of so much of said sign as has already been erected. The defendant is a…
1Opinion of the Court
Scott, J.:
Before proceeding to discuss the question- as to the validity of the “ sky sign ” ordinance, it is necessary to consider an objection raised , by defendant to the form of action adopted by plaintiff. It is argued that an injunction will not lie to enforce a municipal ordinance. As a general rule this is undoubtedly true (Village of New Rochelle v. Lang, 75 Hun, 608 ; City of Mount Vernon v. Seeley, 74 App. Div. 50), but the Legislature has the right t-o establish such , a remedy, and we think that it has done so with reference to violations . of. the Building Code in the city of New…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Matter of Application of JacobsNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- McCluskey v. . CromwellNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- City of Rochester v. . WestNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- People Ex Rel. Pumpyansky v. . KeatingNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
- City of Chicago v. Gunning SystemIllinois Supreme Court · 1905
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Andrew B. Hendryx Co. v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- C. K. Eddy & Sons v. TierneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
- Mecca Realty Co. v. Kellogg Toasted Corn Flakes Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
- People ex rel. M. Wineburgh Advertising Co. v. MurphyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Town of Union v. ZillerMississippi Supreme Court · 1928
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.