Legal Opinion

Jutsum v. Bricklayers', Plasterers' & Stonemasons' Union

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 20, 1894PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from special term, Monroe county. Action by Frederick E. Jutsum against the Bricklayers’, Plasterers’ & Stonemasons’ Union of Rochester and others to recover damages for inducing persons not to employ plaintiff in his trade. From an order directing a bill of particulars as to the claims for damages, plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtDwight, P. J.

The plaintiff claims damages for a wrong done Mm by the defendants, wMch had the effect to cause contractors and employers in his trade and calling to refuse to employ him, and thus rendered him unable to obtain employment, and deprived him of Ms means of earning a livelihood. The order appealed from requires the plaintiff, by a bill of particulars, to specify the names and addresses of the contractors and employers who have thus been influenced to refuse him employment. The requirement seems to be very reasonable, and one to wMch no objection can be made on the merits. It is no answer to it…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Post Express Printing Co. v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Williams v. FolsomNew York Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Dietz v. LeberAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
  2. Dietz v. LeberAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
  3. Roberts v. Safety Buggy Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
  4. Mussinan v. Willner Wood Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902

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

Powered by the Exa API