
    UPPERCU v. STEVENS et al.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    January 30, 1914.)
    Injunction (§ 137*)—Temporary Injunction—Riqht. Where the complaint did not allege a cause of action which would entitle plaintiff to an injunction, the court was not authorized by Code Civ. Proc. § 603, to grant a temporary injunction.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Injunction,. Cent Dig. §§ 307-309; Dec. Dig. § 137.*]
    Appeal from Special Term, New York County.
    Action by Inglis M. Uppercu against Harry M. Stevens and another. From an order granting a motion for an injunction, defendants appeal. Order reversed, and motion denied.
    Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and McLAUGHLIN, CLARKE, SCOTT, and HOTCHKISS, JJ.
    Harold T. Edwards, of New York City, for appellants.
    Henry Amerman, of New York City, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

As the plaintiff presented to the court below no complaint showing that a cause of action existed which would entitle the plaintiff to an injunction, the court was without authority, under section 603 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to grant a temporary injunction.

The order appealed from should therefore be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion for an injunction denied, with $10 costs.  