# Goodwins, Inc. v. Hagedorn

> New York Court of Appeals · October 18, 1951 · 303 N.Y. 300

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5481828

## Case

- **Full name:** Goodwins, Inc. v. Frank Hagedorn, as President of Department Store & Variety Store Employees Union, Local 1115A, Retail Clerks International Association, A. F. of L.
- **Court:** New York Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** October 18, 1951
- **Citations:** 303 N.Y. 300; 101 N.E.2d 697
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Froessel
- **Judges:** Dye, Froessel, Fuld, Loughran
- **Cited by:** 100 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5481828

## Opinion text

Froessel, J.
(concurring). We are all agreed that the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act) is silent on the specific subject of stranger picketing by a labor organization as an unfair labor practice. A minority is of the opinion that because of its close relation to activities proscribed by that statute (U. S. Code, tit. 29, § 158, subd. [b]) the picketing here complained of falls within the area of proscription. Had the sponsors of the Taft-Hartley Act and the Congress so intended, surely they would have made their purpose manifest, for plain language was readily available.
In my view the Taft-Hartley Act does not deprive the Supreme Court of this State of jurisdiction of the subject matter, which is “ governable by the State or it is entirely ungoverned ” (International Union, U. A. W. A., v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Bd., 336 U. S. 245, 254 ). Accordingly, I concur with the Chief Judge for reversal and remission for decision on the merits.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5481828. Public record. Not legal advice.