STALBAN v. FRIEDMAN

PER CURIAM.

The record discloses that a "labor dispute" was here involved, even though members of the defendant unions were not employed by the plaintiff. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 876-a, subd. 10; Goldfinger v. Feintuch, 276 N.Y. 281; May's Furs Ready-to-Wear, Inc., v. Bauer, 282 id. 331. See, also, Lauf v. Shinner Co., 303 U.S. 323; New Negro Alliance v. Sanitary Grocery Co., Id. 552.) The plaintiff, having failed to plead or prove the facts prescribed by section 876-a of the Civil Practice Act, could not be accorded injunctive relief. ( Boro Park Market v. Heller, 280 N.Y. 481.) The question is not affected by the fact, if it be a fact, that the State Labor Relations Board has held that the union, whose members are now employed by the plaintiff, is the proper agency for collective bargaining. ( Fairbanks Cube Steak House, Inc., v. Viera, 259 App. Div. 804.)

The judgment should be reversed, with costs, and the complaint dismissed, with costs.