Case Name: Werther-Rausch Company et al., Appellants, v. National Association of Employing Lithographers et al., Respondents. Sackett & Wilhelms Lithographing and Printing Company et al., Appellants, v. National Association of Employing Lithographers et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1914-05-12
Citations: 211 N.Y. 554
Docket Number: 
Parties: Werther-Rausch Company et al., Appellants, v. National Association of Employing Lithographers et al., Respondents. Sackett & Wilhelms Lithographing and Printing Company et al., Appellants, v. National Association of Employing Lithographers et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 211
Pages: 554–555

Head Matter:
Werther-Rausch Company et al., Appellants, v. National Association of Employing Lithographers et al., Respondents. Sackett & Wilhelms Lithographing and Printing Company et al., Appellants, v. National Association of Employing Lithographers et al., Respondents.
Werther-Rauseh Co. v. Eat. Assn. Employing Lithographers, ■ 148 App. Div. 618, reversed.
Saehett & Wilhelms L. & P. Co. v. Eat. Assn. Employing Lithographers, 148 App. Div. 598, reversed.
(Argued April 28, 1914;
decided May 12, 1914.)
Appeal, in each of the above-entitled actions, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 1, 1912, upon, an order reversing so far as appealed from the judgment of Special Term decreeing that upon the evidence taken at the trial and upon the pleadings the plaintiffs were entitled at the time the action was instituted to the injunction prayed for, but dismissing the complaint with costs to the plaintiffs on the motion of the plaintiffs, the sole ground for dismissal being that by reason of lapse of time and circumstances happening after the commencement of the action the plaintiffs no longer required the relief to which' they were entitled. The Appellate Division further directed a dismissal of the complaint, with costs to defendants.
The actions were brought to restrain defendants from negotiating certain promissory notes.
J. Aspinwall Hodge for appellants.
Charles E. Rushmore and Henry Root Stern for respondents.

Opinion:
Order of Appellate Division in each case reversed, and judgment of the Special Term affirmed, with costs in both courts, on the opinions of Ingraham, P. J., and Lahghlin, J., below.
Concur: Willard Bartlett, Oh. J., Hiscock, Chase, Cüddeback and Cardozo, JJ. Not sitting: Werner and Miller, JJ.