General
Alexander R. Grossman, Respondent, v. Consolidated Gas Company of New York, Appellant
186 N.Y. 541·New York Court of Appeals·1906·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Alexander R. Grossman, Respondent, v. Consolidated Gas Company of New York, Appellant.
Grossman v. Consolidated Gas Co., 114 App. Div. 242, affirmed.
(Argued October 5, 1906;
decided October 16, 1906.)
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 26, 1906, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion for an injunction pendente lite herein.
The following questions were certified: “1. Whether or not the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to entertain this action;
“2. Whether or not, if the Supreme Court did have jurisdiction to entertain this action, it ought to have entertained jurisdiction in view of the principle of comity.”
Joseph JL. Ghoate and John A. Garner for appellant.
Clarence J. Shearn for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
.Order affirmed, with costs, and questions certified answered to the effect that the Supreme Court has jurisdiction of this action and that there is nothing in the principle of comity that prohibits the exercise of that jurisdiction, on opinion in Richman v. Consolidated Gas Co. (186 N. Y. 209).
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Yann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.