# Greenfield v. Central Labor Council

> Oregon Supreme Court · October 1, 1920 · 104 Or. 236

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6907658

## Case

- **Full name:** GREENFIELD v. CENTRAL LABOR COUNCIL
- **Court:** Oregon Supreme Court
- **Decided:** October 1, 1920
- **Citations:** 104 Or. 236; 192 P. 783; 1920 Ore. LEXIS 1
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Bennett
- **Judges:** Bean, Bennett, Benson, Brown, Burnett, Consideration, Harris, Johns, McBride, McCourt, Took
- **Cited by:** 20 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/6907658

## Opinion text

BENNETT, J.,
Specially Concurring. — I concur in
the reasoning and general result reached in the opinion of Mr. Justice Johns in this case, but I think the limitation on the' number of pickets is too narrow. On principle, as shown in Mr. Justice Johns’ opinion, the right of the defendants to solicit and persuade plaintiff’s customers in a peaceable manner to withhold their patronage ought not to be limited except to prevent physical interference with the ingress and egress of customers.
In this case the pickets were ladies. We should and must assume that these young women are just as modest and ladylike as average women, -and it would be unnecessarily embarrassing to restrict them so that they would be compelled to act alone. I see no necessity or just reason for so narrow a limitation.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6907658. Public record. Not legal advice.