This page was created by Anonymous.
Irving Stetkin's stationary store looted
The only details of the damage to Stetkin's store is in newspaper stories about the civil suits against the city brought by white merchants. Stetkin is not part of the group of twenty who brought the first suits, but is mentioned in stories published at the end of July, by which time 106 merchants had filed suits. He appears as an example because of the large damages he sought, $2068, as a result of which, the New York Sun reported, Stetkin "is not in business anymore." Or at least not at that location. He also sued for damages to a second unspecified business, at 363 Lenox Avenue, four buildings to the south of the stationary store, according to the New York Times, where he was still in business in 1942. In 1930, the federal census records that Stetkin had lived above the store at 363 Lenox Avenue, a building anomalous in this area of Harlem in being home to only white residents. The six other households included three headed by men who owned stores in Harlem later looted during the disorder who joined Stetkin in suing the city, William Gindin, Jacob Saloway and Michael D'Agostino. There is no evidence of whether Stetkin still lived there in 1935; Gindin at least had relocated to another building on Lenox Avenue by the time of the disorder.
After the city lost the civil case that went to trial to test the merchants' case, Stetkin's actions for damages were one of seven cases taken to the Supreme Court to determine the city's liability. The damages claimed in those cases totaled $20,000, according to a report in the New York Times; Justice Shientag awarded a total of only $1200. Stetkin received the largest award, although newspaper stories disagreed on the amount. The New York Times identified the award as $550 for damages to both the stationary store and the business at 363 Lenox Avenue that he had valued at more than $2000, while the New York Amsterdam News identified the award as $700. While the New York Times reported that the city would appeal the decisions, there is no evidence that happened.
This page has tags:
This page references:
- "106 Suits Filed Under Mob Law in Harlem Riot," New York World-Telegram, July 23, 1935 [clipping]
- US Census, 1930, Enumeration District 31-920, Sheet 10A-B, Manhattan, New York, New York (Ancestry.com)
- "Harlem Riots to Cost Dearly," New York Sun, July 23, 1935 [clipping]
- "Cops not on Job, Say Harlem Suits," New York Post, July 23, 1935 [clipping]
- "City Loser in 7 'Riot' Suits," New York Amsterdam News, March 7, 1936, 1.
- "7 Win Harlem Riot Suits," New York Times, March 5, 1936, 14.