Opinion
June 20, 1906.
John F. Dillon and John A. Garver, for the appellant.
Clarence J. Shearn, for the respondent.
The facts in this case present similar questions to those discussed in the opinion in Richman v. Consolidated Gas Co. ( 114 App. Div. 216), argued and decided herewith. In this case, however, with the same justice presiding, the motion for an injunction was granted, which is doubtless accounted for by the fact that the opinion of the learned Circuit judge of the United States construing the restraining order, theretofore granted in the suit instituted in the Federal court by the defendant, was filed in the meantime. (See Consolidated Gas Co. v. Mayer, 146 Fed. Rep. 150.)
It follows that the order should be affirmed upon the prevailing opinion in the Richman case, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
O'BRIEN, P.J., and PATTERSON, J., concurred; McLAUGHLIN and HOUGHTON, JJ., dissented.
The order here appealed from should be reversed and the motion to continue the injunction denied on the second ground stated in my opinion in Richman v. Consolidated Gas Co. ( 114 App. Div. 216), decided herewith, for an affirmance of the order there appealed from.
Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Settle order on notice.