Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

125 A.D. 787

Suesskind v. Bingham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1908-05-08

Appeal- hy the defendants, Theodore A. Bingham, as police commissioner of the .city of New York, and others, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and. entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 14th day of February, 1908, continuing a temporary injunction pendente lite.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1932

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1908-05-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Ingraham, J.:

¶1It is quite impossible to see upon what ground the police could claim that these plaintiffs were violating any statute upon the facts here presented. The same question is presented, however, as in the case of Eden Musee American Co., Ltd., v. Bingham (125 App. Div. 780), decided herewith, and plaintiff’s remedy is not by injunction, but by an action at law against the individual officers, or an indictment, if their property or business is interfered with.

¶2The order appealed from is reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion for an injunction denied, with ten dollars costs.

¶3McLaughlin, Glabke and Scott, JJ., concurred; Laughlin, J. dissented.

/125/ad/787 · .json · Public domain