Legal Opinion
Seligman & Latz, Inc. v. Noonan
New York Supreme Court
Decided April 23, 1951PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRoberts, J.
This action is brought by Seligman & Latz, Inc., and Seligman & Latz Rochester Corporation as plaintiffs to enjoin the defendant from entering the employ of a rival beauty parlor in violation of a covenant contained in a contract of *97employment. The motion to dismiss the complaint is upon the ground that the plaintiffs do not have legal capacity to sue and that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
On August 12, 1949, Sidney Seligman, Edward K. Latz and Israel A. Latz, a partnership doing business under the name of Seligman & Latz, entered into a…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Diamond Match Co. v. . RoeberNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Devlin v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Rosenthal Paper Co. v. National Folding Box & Paper Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Rochester Lantern Co. v. Stiles & Parker Press Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
- New York Bank Note Co. v. Hamilton Bank Note Engraving & Printing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1905
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Minevitch v. PuleoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959
- Nenow v. LC Cassidy & Son of Florida, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1962
- Inland Rubber Corporation v. Triple a Tire Service, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1962
- Boxley v. ChalpinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Howe v. Anderson, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Adams County1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.