Rigas v. Livingston

70 N.E. 107 (1904)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P owned a fruit stand on the sidewalk in front of 89 Park Row in the city of New York. Levy (D) was a tenant and occupant of a store in front of which P’s stand was located. D wanted the stand removed and enlisted the aid of city authorities. P took an action against the city authorities in the Supreme Court to enjoin them from removing his stand. The order purported to restrain not only the city authorities but also all persons having knowledge of the order. Thereafter the son in law of D, that son in law being the landlord of the building, sued in Municipal Court to remove P. P never appeared in those proceedings and default was issued; a city marshal and the son in law’s attorney destroyed P’s stand. P then applied for punishment against the offending parties in contempt. The proof showed that they all knew of the existence of the injunction. They were found in contempt and fined $150. D appealed, and the order was affirmed by the Appellate Division. A further appeal was allowed and the Special Term found that D did by trick and scheme violate the injunction; this despite the fact that D was not present nor did he give any instructions to the persons whom actually removed the stand.