Case Name: KEITH & PROCTOR AMUSEMENT CO. v. BINGHAM, Police Com'r, et al.
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1908-05-08
Citations: 110 N.Y.S. 219
Docket Number: 
Parties: KEITH & PROCTOR AMUSEMENT CO. v. BINGHAM, Police Com’r, et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 110
Pages: 219–219

Head Matter:
KEITH & PROCTOR AMUSEMENT CO. v. BINGHAM, Police Com’r, et al.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
May 8, 1908.)
Appeal from Special Term.
Action by the Keith & Proctor Amusement Company against Theodore A. Bingham, police commissioner, and others. From an order continuing during the pendency of the action (108 N. Y. Supp. 205) the temporary injunction granted, defendants appeal.
Reversed.
Argued before INGRAHAM, McRAUGHUN, LAUGHLIN, CLARKE, and SCOTT, JJ.
Theodore Connoly, for appellants.
Maurice Goodman, for respondent.

Opinion:
INGRAHAM, J.
The question here' is the same as that presented in the case of Shepard v. Bingham, Police Commissioner (decided herewith) 110 N. Y. Supp. 217. In this case the whole police department were enjoined so long as the plaintiff's entertainment shall be given in such a manner as not to disturb the public peace or amount to a serious interruption of the repose and religious liberty of the community. There would thus.seem to be imposed upon the police officers the question of determining whether a performance of the plaintiff would be a serious interruption of the repose and religious liberty of the community, with the danger of a commitment for a contempt in case they should disagree with the court as to whether there was-such an interruption.
The "order appealed from should therefore be reversed, with $10' costs and disbursements, and the motion for an injunction denied, with $10 costs.' All concur (LAUGHLIN, J., in memorandum).