The opinion of the court was delivered by: GALSTON
This is an order to show cause by the plaintiff to remand the action to the Supreme Court of the State of New York for the County of Nassau.
Plaintiff, Kon-Tempo Furniture, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as 'Kon-Tempo'), instituted action by service of summons and complaint in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Nassau County, against defendants, Upholsterers & Spring Makers Union, Local 76, affiliated with United Furniture Workers of America, A.F. of L.-C.I.O., and Ernest Kessler and Frank Marino as officers of said union. The complaint alleges that Kon-Tempo is a New York corporation, having its principal place of business in Hicksville, New York, and that it is engaged in the manufacture and sale of furniture. It also alleges that all of Kon-Tempo's employees are members of United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 1327 (also referred to in papers annexed to the complaint as 'Local 3127'), A.F. of L.-C.I.O., and that, after negotiations, Kon-Tempo entered into a collective bargaining agreement with 'Local 1327' covering all its employees.
The complaint further alleges:
'10. On the morning of August 29th, 1956, defendant union Local 76 maliciously, and in violation of law, started to picket plaintiff's premises with two pickets, and on September 4th, 1956, with six pickets, who carried large and prominent placards bearing the following legend:
"We want our jobs back. We were locked out by Urban Furniture, which is Kon-Tempo under a new name. Help us win back our new jobs -- Local 76, A.F. of L.-C.I.O.' and have picketed plaintiff's premises from 8:00 A.M. of that day until 6:00 P.M., and have threatened to continue such picketing indefinitely.'
Paragraph 15 of the complaint then alleges:
'In furtherance of the 'strike' and the picketing aforesaid, defendant union Local 76 has maliciously, illegally and without just cause, committed and threatened to continue to commit, the following acts:
'(a) It has placed picketts in front of plaintiff's place of business.
'(b) It has induced various customers of plaintiff not to enter plaintiff's place of business.
'(c) It has prevented various truckers from making deliveries of merchandise to plaintiff's place of business.
'(d) It has picketed in groups, barring the ingress to and egress from plaintiff's place of business.
'(e) It has caused its pickets to shout to plaintiff's customers and passers-by, among other things, that a 'strike' was in progress, and beseeching the public not to patronize plaintiff; and
'(f) It has caused false and fraudulent picket signs to be carried by the pickets aforesaid to mislead the public into believing that a labor dispute exists ...