Mode Novelty Co. v. Taylor
| Citation | 122 N.J.Eq. 593,195 A. 819 |
| Parties | MODE NOVELTY CO. v. TAYLOR et al. |
| Decision Date | 27 December 1937 |
| Court | New Jersey Court of Chancery |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Picketing is a concomitant of a strike. Where no strike exists picketing is unlawful.
2. When a strike ends there is no longer any necessity or excuse for picketing.
3. A strike is ended when the places of the strikers have been filled and the employer's business is operating in a normal manner and to a normal extent.
Suit by the Mode Novelty Company against Samuel Taylor and others to restrain picketing.
Picketing restrained.
Jacob Lipman, of Newark, for complainant. Samuel L. Rothbard, of Newark, for defendants.
BERRY, Vice Chancellor.
This is a strike case. The complainant is a manufacturer of novelty hats at 242 Thirteenth avenue, Newark, N. J., and at the date of the strike on or about November 9, 1937, employed twenty-five persons, including executives. Eighteen of these employees went out on strike as a result of complainant's refusal to sign a closed shop agreement sponsored by the C.I.O. Defendants' affidavits show that these striking employees are members of "United Used Products Workers Local Industrial Union No. 132," a C.I.O. affiliate. Only the striking employees, however, are made defendants in this suit.
On the filing of the bill an order to show cause with limited restraint was advised by Vice Chancellor Bigelow. There was no restraint against picketing. The cause came on for hearing before me on the return of the order to show cause and application was then made for restraint against picketing. It was then represented to the court, orally, that the strike had terminated by reason of the fact that the complainant had employed other persons to fill all the places vacated by the striking employees and that its business was being conducted normally except for the blocking of ingress and egress to the place of business by the pickets. These representations have since been verified by affidavits filed in the cause. The controversy may therefore, be disposed of with little difficulty and without considering the merits of, the original dispute.
Picketing is a concomitant of a strike. Where no strike exists picketing is unlawful. Gevas v. Greek Restaurant Workers' Club, 99 N.J.Eq. 770, 787, 134 A. 309; Feller v. Local 144, International, etc., Union, 121 N.J.Eq. 452, 191 A. 111. When a strike ends, the controversy ends, and there is no longer any necessity or excuse for picketing. "A strike is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kitty Kelly Shoe Corp. v. United Retail Employees of Newark, N. J., Local No. 108
...not employ the individuals who are picketing under any circumstances and on any terms. He has discharged them". In Mode Novelty Company v. Taylor, 122 N.J.Eq. 593, 195 A. 819, it was held that picketing is a concomitant of a strike, and where no strike exists picketing is unlawful; that whe......
-
Miller's, Inc. v. Journeymen Tailors Union Local No. 195
...justified. International Ticket Co. v. Wendrich, 122 N.J.Eq. 222, 193 A. 808; affirmed 123 N.J.Eq. 172, 196 A. 474; Mode Novelty Co. v. Taylor, 122 N.J.Eq. 593, 195 A. 819; Mitnick v. Furniture Workers, etc., 124 N.J.Eq. 147, 200 A. 553. The defendants claim the right to peaceably picket fo......
-
Motion Picture Mach. Projectionists Protective Union, Local No. 473 v. Rialto Theatre Co.
...et al. v. Dail-Overland Co., 6 Cir., 274 F. 56; Samuel Hertzig Corp. v. Gibbs, 295 Mass. 229, 3 N.E.2d 831; Mode Novelty Co. v. Taylor, 122 N.J.Eq. 593, 195 A. 819. In West Allis Foundry Co. v. State, 186 Wis. 24, 202 N.W. 302, 306, these factors were embraced in this language: "* * * A str......
-
McPherson Hotel Co. v. Smith
...of employees was because the hotel was previously overmanned, (as is conceded by defendants). The case of Mode Novelty Co. v. Taylor, 122 N.J.Eq. 593, 195 A. 819, 820, upon which complainant relies, lays down the principles (1) that where no strike exists picketing is unlawful; (2) that eve......