History
  • No items yet
midpage
Rochelle v. Amendola
190 N.Y.S.2d 331
| N.Y. App. Div. | 1959
|
Check Treatment

In an action for an injunction, the appeal is from an order denying a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts *826sufficient to constitute a cause o£ action. Respondent, who is in the bail bond business, alleges that appellant was employed as a branch office manager or “ Bail Bond Executing Agent ” and that he agreed in writing that he would not enter the bail bond business for five years subsequent to the termination of employment with respondent and that within said five-year period he has threatened to conduct a bail bond business in the same building where respondent maintains his place of business. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Rochelle v. Amendola
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Jun 8, 1959
Citation: 190 N.Y.S.2d 331
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.