Prior to 1942 defendant had instituted or was the instigator of five separate actions against complainants, or one of them, all growing out of a suit originally brought by a preferred stockholder of the complainant newspaper company against defendant. He also was plaintiff in a libel suit brought against the newspaper company and the complainant Newhouse, the president of the company, which suit he discontinued after motion made to strike his complaint. In none of these suits did he succeed in establishing a meritorious cause of action. Since September, 1942, defendant has commenced two other suits in Chancery and one in the Essex County Court of Common Pleas against complainants, or one of them, and he has threatened to institute others. The proofs conclusively show that defendant has on many occasions stated his intention to harass and torment the complainants, especially Newhouse, with litigation until he destroys Newhouse and his newspapers, and that he would never stop litigation against Newhouse until he had driven him out of Newark or until he, the defendant, died, Held, Chancery has jurisdiction to prevent a multiplicity of suits brought with intent to harass and vex, and to protect complainant's business against unlawful injury, especially where the instigator of such suits has had his day in court to prove his claims and has failed (as defendant has), or the evidence shows that he has no just cause of action or that he is estopped by decree, release or laches. Limited restraint imposed.
PER CURIAM.
The decree under review will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Vice-Chancellor Fielder.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, PARKER, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, COLIE, WELLS, RAFFERTY, THOMPSON, DILL, FREUND, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.
Comments