TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People's Coat, Apron and Towel Supply Company v. Light

People’s Coat, Apron and Towel Supply Company, Respondent, v. Harry Light Et Al., Appellants

People's Coat, Apron & Towel Supply Co. v. Light, 121 N.E. 886 (N.Y. 1918)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 3, 1918
Citations
121 N.E. 886224 N.Y. 7271918 N.Y. LEXIS 1137
Summary
Appeal from a judgment, entered April 15, 1916, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, reversing a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court on trial at Special Term and directing judgment in favor of plaintiff. The action was brought to restrain the defendants, one of whom was formerly in plaintiff’s employ, from impairing and interfering with plaintiff’s business, from soliciting the trade of plaintiff’s customers previously served by the defendant so employed, and from making use of or disclosing the knowledge and information contained in plaintiff’s original list of their names and addresses. The complaint alleged that Light was for some three years in plaintiff’s service, where, as driver of its wagon delivering laundered coats and aprons to individuals and collecting payment for the use thereof, he acquired knowledge of, and access to, plaintiff’s customers. Discharged by plaintiff, Light after a brief interval entered the service of defendant Cohen, who by his inducement, under the name of :the Mutual Coat and Apron Supply Company, began a business similar to that of the plaintiff. Light, using Ms knowledge of plaintiff’s customers acquired in its service, and by virtue of his former representation of plaintiff, went to them and induced them to substitute Cohen’s outfitting for that of the plaintiff, and thereby secured their business for Cohen and deprived plaintiff of it.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan, McLaughlin and Crane, JJ.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 30 cases

View all citing references →
1919: 11924: 11925: 31936: 11946: 11953: 11958: 31959: 11960: 11961: 21962: 21963: 31964: 11965: 11970: 11971: 11972: 11974: 11978: 11979: 11983: 11987: 119192026peak 1925 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Preferred Electric & Wire Corp. v. Katz462 F. Supp. 1178 (E.D.N.Y. 1978)
  2. Town & Country House & Homes Service, Inc. v. Evans189 A.2d 390 (Conn. 1963)
  3. Town & Country House & Home Service, Inc. v. Newbery147 N.E.2d 724 (N.Y. 1958)
  4. Harry R. Defler Corp. v. Kleeman19 A.D.2d 396 (1963)
  5. Hecht Foods, Inc. v. Sherman43 A.D.2d 850 (1974)
  6. Leo Silfen, Inc. v. Cream37 A.D.2d 721 (1971)

Most recent

  1. Churchill Communications Corp. v. Demyanovich668 F. Supp. 207 (S.D.N.Y. 1987)
  2. Shenandoah Studios of Stained Glass, Inc. v. Waters27 Va. Cir. 464 (Warren Cir. Ct. 1983)
  3. Velo-Bind, Inc. v. Scheck485 F. Supp. 102 (S.D.N.Y. 1979)
  4. Preferred Electric & Wire Corp. v. Katz462 F. Supp. 1178 (E.D.N.Y. 1978)
  5. Hecht Foods, Inc. v. Sherman43 A.D.2d 850 (1974)
  6. Leo Silfen, Inc. v. Cream278 N.E.2d 636 (N.Y. 1972)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list