Legal Opinion
Fay v. American Cystoscope Makers, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 4, 1951PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RYAN, District Judge.
Plaintiff moves to remand. In the complaint filed in the New York Supreme Court, three causes of action are set forth.
The first cause of action substantially charges a conspiracy among the defendants, American Cystoscope Makers, Inc., a New York corporation (hereafter, Cysto-scope), Max Sanchez, individually and as president of Local 1614, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL (hereafter Local 1614), and Milton Silver-man, individually and as business manager of Local 1614. The object of the conspiracy alleged to have been entered into de liberately and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Gully v. First Nat. Bank in MeridianSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Amalgamated Ass'n of Street, Electric Railway & Motor Coach Employees of America, Division 998 v. Wisconsin Employment Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. CodySupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Chappell v. WaterworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Charles Dowd Box Co. v. CourtneySupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Association of Westinghouse Salaried Employees v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Charles D. Bonanno Linen Service, Inc. v. William J. McCarthyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1983
- John Jones v. General Tire & Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1976
- Rettig v. Arlington Heights Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1975
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.