Legal Opinion

Coons v. Chrystie

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 15, 1898PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Action for in junction,, to restrain interference by the defendants. with plaintiff’s business as a gasfitter, and for damages.

1Opinion of the CourtBischoff, J.

Upon such, conflict of evidence as appears in this case, touching the main question at issue, I credit the witnesses called on behalf of the plaintiff, and, while the proof affords no - sufficient basis for a money judgment for more than nominal damages, the right to an injunction is, I think, clear. Acting in behalf of the defendant association, and at its instance, the individuals defendant caused workmen in the plaintiff’s employ to stop their work and abandon the employment, not that they might secure better wages elsewhere,, or to protect 'the scale of wages, but solely to the end that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Davis v. ZimmermanNew York Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Davis v. United Portable Hoisting EngineersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Allis-Chalmers Co. v. Iron Molders' Union No. 125U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin · 1906
  2. New York Central Iron Works Co. v. BrennanNew York Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Reform Club of Masons & Plasters' L. A. 706 v. Laborers Union Protective SocietyNew York Supreme Court · 1899

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

Powered by the Exa API