Canepa v. "John Doe"
12 N.E.2d 790 | NY | 1938
The complaint sufficiently alleges that the picketing by the defendants is part of a true secondary boycott and an unlawful interference with the business *55
of the plaintiff (Goldfinger v. Feintuch,
The order should be affirmed, without costs. The first question certified is not answered and the second question is answered in the affirmative.
CRANE, Ch. J., LEHMAN, O'BRIEN, LOUGHRAN, FINCH and RIPPEY, JJ., concur; HUBBS, J., taking no part.
Order affirmed, etc.