Legal Opinion

Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. McDonough

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 22, 1959Published

1Opinion of the CourtSaul S. Street, J.

Plaintiff does not purchase the products of the defendants’ employer for resale, as was the case in Goldfinger v. Feintuch (276 N. Y. 281) and no case of picketing “ against a non-union product ” (p. 286) is, therefore, involved. Nor does plaintiff use the services of the defendants’ employer, as was the case in People v. Muller (286 N. Y. 281) where the person picketed refused to obtain the services of the union for the maintenance of his burglar alarm system (p. 283). The case appears to be governed by the doctrine of Arden Sales Corp. v. Hawley (176 Misc. 821, affd. 261 App. Div. 953…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Local 1976, United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  2. Goldfinger v. FeintuchNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
  3. People v. MullerNew York Court of Appeals · 1941
  4. Canepa v. "John Doe"New York Court of Appeals · 1938
  5. Englander Co. v. TishlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API