People v. Ginsberg
| Decision Date | 13 June 1933 |
| Citation | 262 N.Y. 556,188 N.E. 62 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Max GINSBERG, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department (238 App. Div. 872, 263 N. Y. S. 401) entered March 31, 1933, which unanimously affirmed a judgment of the County Court of Kings county entered upon a verdict convicting the defendant of the crime of coercion in violation of section 530 of the Penal Law (Consol. Laws, c. 40). The indictment charged that the defendant during the month of June, 1932, requested, directed, and commanded George Bloom, the owner of, and who conducted, a drug store in Third avenue, Brooklyn N. Y., to become a member of the City Pharmaceutical Association and to remove from his drug store window the price cards of certain articles of merchandise, that thereafter, and on or about July 2, 1932, the defendant stated to Bloom and threatened that, if he failed to comply with such direction and command, injury would be done to his property, and that thereafter on July 5, 1932, and on July 15, 1932, windows in the store were broken.
H. Thornton Banks, Samuel L. Miller, and Alfred Selter, all of New York City, for appellant.
William F. X. Georgan, Dist. Atty., of Brooklyn (Henry J. Walsh, of Brooklyn, of counsel), for respondent.
Judgment affirmed.
HUBBS, J., not sitting.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Brissette, 18-1254
...store owner to become a member of a trade association and to remove advertisements" from his storefronts, see People v. Ginsberg, 262 N.Y. 556, 188 N.E. 62 (1933) (per curiam), and "compelling union members to drop lawsuits against union leadership," see People v. Kaplan, 240 A.D. 72, 74-75......
-
Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc.
...threats and acts of force and violence to dictate and restrict the actions and decisions of businesses. See, e.g., People v. Ginsberg, 262 N. Y. 556, 188 N. E. 62 (1933) (affirming convictions for coercion where defendant used threatened and actual property damage to compel the owner of a d......
-
Sekhar v. United States
...had consistently held that the sort of interference with rights that occurred here was coercion. See, e.g., People v. Ginsberg, 262 N.Y. 556, 188 N.E. 62 (1933) (per curiam ) (compelling store owner to become a member of a trade association and to remove advertisements); People v. Scotti, 2......
- People v. Manowitz
-
CRIMINAL LAW--EXTORTION OR PUBLIC POLICY, WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE?: FIRST CIRCUIT FINDS HOBBS ACT EXTORTION MAY APPLY TO THE ACTIONS OF TWO BOSTON CITY HALL OFFICIALS--UNITED STATES V. BRISSETTE, 919 F.3D 670 (1ST CIR. 2019).
...v. Scotti 195 N.E. 162, 163 (N.Y. 1934) (per curiam) (distinguishing extortion from common law crime of coercion); People v. Ginsberg, 188 N.E. 62, 62 (N.Y. App. Ct. 1933) (affirming convictions where threats and property damage to compel store owner to join trade organization); People v. K......