Legal Opinion

Traub Amusement Co. v. Macker

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 19, 1925PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCallaghan, J.

The plaintiff conducts a moving picture and vaudeville theatre. The defendant Macker is the president of the Moving Picture Machine Operators’ Protective Union, Local 306. The theatre conducted by the plaintiff is not “ unionized,” although the plaintiff has from time to time employed members of the union, and has never refused to employ an individual because of his membership in the union. It, at one time, made what is known as a union contract with the musicians, and, although there is a claim that such contract was broken by the plaintiff, proof establishes that the contract was terminated…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hitchman Coal & Coke Co. v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  2. Auburn Draying Co. v. . WardellNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
  3. Carroll v. Republic Distributing Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920
  4. Stuyvesant L. & B. Corp. v. ReinerNew York Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Yablonowitz v. KornAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Blossom Dairy Co. v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Hammer v. BaumNew York Supreme Court · 1930
  3. L. Daitch & Co. v. Retail Grocery & Dairy Clerks' UnionNew York Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Retail Clerks Union Local 779 v. Lerner Shops of Florida, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1939
  5. Retail Clerks Union Local 779 v. Lerner Shops of Florida, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API