Rosenfeld v. Hittleman

Order denying plaintiff’s motion for an injunction pendente lite affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. In the circumstances the denial was not error and, under the rule in Schenck v. Underhill (205 App. Div. 162), the exercise of discretion by the Special Term should not be disturbed. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.