Harding v. Corn Products Refining Co.

• Decision Date: 19 January 1909
• Docket Number: 1,497.
• Citation: 168 F. 658
• Parties: HARDING et al. v. CORN PRODUCTS REFINING CO.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

168 F. 658

HARDING et al. v. CORN PRODUCTS REFINING CO.

No. 1,497.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

January 19, 1909

Rehearing Denied February 16, 1909.

In a suit brought by Chicago Real Estate Loan & Trust Company against Corn Products Refining Company and other defendants originally in a state court, but pending in the Circuit Court of the United States on removal proceedings, the several appellants were enjoined from prosecution of a subsequent suit in the superior court of Cook county, commenced by the appellant, George F. Harding, against certain of the defendants in such pending suit, impleaded with others, and from other proceedings mentioned in the order. This appeal is from the injunctional order so granted by the trial court entered December 26, 1907, but bearing date December 13 1907, which reads as follows:

'(Title of Cause.) This day comes on to be heard the motion of the defendant, Corn Products Refining Company, entered of record herein, November 4, 1907, for an injunction restraining the prosecution of the suit of George F. Harding v. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Corn Products Refining Company, et al., filed in the superior court of Cook county, Illinois, on or about October 19, 1907, and bearing general number therein 263,565, and for an order to compel the dismissal of said last described suit; and there also now coming on to be heard the rule entered herein on November 12, 1907, against George F. Harding, George F.

Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. Joyner, to show cause why they and each of them should not be attached for contempt of this court for violating the restraining order entered herein on June 8, 1907; and the court having heard and considered the answers to said rule, filed herein on November 13, 1907, by said George F. Harding, George F. Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. Joyner, and having considered the petition of said Corn Products Refining Company, filed herein on November 4, 1907, and the exhibits thereto, and all the records and files herein, and all the oral evidence given by and statements of said George F. Harding, George F. Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. Joyner in open court; and the said George F. Harding, George F. Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. Joyner being now present in open court, in person and being also represented by said George F. Harding and William J. Ammen, as their solicitors; and the court having heard the arguments of Levy Maher, Esq., solicitor for said petitioner, and of said solicitors for said George F. Harding, George F. Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. Joyner, and being now fully advised in the premises: The court finds that by the institution of said suit of George F. Harding v. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey et al., the said George F. Harding, George F. Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. Joyner have, and each of them has, knowingly and willfully violated the order of this court, entered herein on June 8, 1907, but the court of its own motion hereby discharges the said rule of November 12, 1907, for contempt, without the infliction of any punishment on any of the said respondents to said rule; and the court further finds that the further prosecution of said suit of George F. Harding v. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey et al., and the institution by said George F. Harding, George F. Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. joyner, of any action like or similar to the present cause should be enjoined. Wherefore the premises considered, it is hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that said George F. Harding, George F. Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. Joyner, and each of them, and their and each of their agents, attorneys, solicitors, and representatives, be, and they hereby are, jointly and severally, restrained and enjoined, until the further order of this court, from further prosecuting or taking any steps or proceedings of any kind in said case of George F. Harding v. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Corn Products Refining Company, et al., which was instituted in the superior court of Cook county, Illinois, on October 19, 1907, and was numbered therein 263,565, and which case was subsequently docketed in and is now pending in this court as case numbered 28,865. It is hereby further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that said George F. Harding, George F. Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. Joyner, and each of them, and their and each of their agents, attorneys, solicitors, and representatives, be, and they hereby are, jointly and severally, restrained and enjoined, until the further order of this court, from in any manner whatsoever, either directly or indirectly, instituting or prosecuting, or causing or inspiring to be instituted or prosecuted, in any court, forum, place, or jurisdiction whatsoever, any other suit, action, or proceeding making charges and seeking relief like or similar to the charges contained and the relief sought in the case herein of Chicago Real Estate Loan & Trust Company against said Corn Products Company et al.; but said George F. Harding, George F. Harding, Jr., William J. Ammen, and A. B. Joyner, jointly or severally, by an appropriate proceeding or petition, and upon a proper showing, may apply to this court for leave to intervene herein or become parties hereto. And 'it is further hereby ordered that that part of said motion of said defendant Corn Products Refining Company, seeking an order compelling the dismissal of said suit of George F. Harding v. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey et al., be, and the same hereby is, continued and reserved for the future consideration of this court.'

The transcript of record is voluminous, containing about 250 printed pages of 'certificate of evidence,' and many more pages of pleadings and proceedings in the primary suit, including the petition for the injunctional order. In so far as these matters are deemed material for the purposes of review, they are mentioned in the opinion.

William J. Ammen and George F. Harding, for appellants.

Levy Mayer, for appellee.

Before GROSSCUP, BAKER, and SEAMAN, Circuit Judges.

SEAMAN Circuit Judge (after stating the facts as above).

The injunctional order (pendente lite) from which this appeal is prosecuted arose in a suit in equity, pending in the trial court, brought by Chicago Real Estate Loan & Trust Company, as complainant, against the appellee and various other corporations and persons named, as defendants.

Under the well-settled doctrine, therefore (for which citations of authority are needless), review of such order does not involve the ultimate merits of the controversy presented by either of the bills in question, nor the major part of the great array of proceedings and evidence contained in the transcript of record and discussed in the briefs and argument submitted by counsel. The only questions for determination are: (1) Had the trial court jurisdiction to entertain the application for an injunction? And, jurisdiction appearing, (2) was the injunctional relief improvidently granted?

1. The bill was originally filed in the circuit court of Cook county, and removed to the Circuit Court of the United States, on petition filed by one of the corporation defendants, averring, with other matters, that the petitioner (Corn Products Refining Company) and all of the other corporations named as defendants were incorporated in and citizens of New Jersey, and not citizens elsewhere, while several of the individual defendants are mentioned as citizens of Illinois, and the complainant, Chicago Real Estate Loan & Trust Company, is an Illinois corporation and citizen. This petition purports to show two causes for removal-- one that the controversy in suit is wholly between the petitioner and the complainant, and thus between citizens of different states; and the other that the bill tenders a federal question in such controversy. The contentions that the trial court acquired no jurisdiction under the removal are not clearly defined by counsel for appellants, either in printed brief or oral argument; but the bill distinctly avers, for the alleged cause of action, conduct and proceedings on the part of the defendants 'in violation of the laws of the United States. ' So removal was authorized for that cause, although no ground may have appeared therefor under the other cause alleged in the petition and jurisdiction of subject-matter and parties to the bill was vested in the trial court.

The appellants George F. Harding and A. B. Joyner were cited to appear and show cause why an injunction should not issue, under a petition filed for that purpose in such pending suit, and both appeared and answered the petition. Personal jurisdiction thereupon is unquestionable, although Harding was not one of the parties to such prior suit, and Joyner had appeared therein only as solicitor of record for the complainant. Whether jurisdiction for the purposes of the order extends as well over the other appellants-- George F. Harding, Jr., who was president of Chicago Real Estate Loan & Trust Company, and not otherwise a party to the proceeding, and William J. Ammen, as attorney representing both that corporation and the first-mentioned appellants in the litigation-- neither made parties to the petition, nor ruled to show cause thereunder, is a question which may be passed, for the present at least, as secondary to the inquiry upon the rightfulness of the injunction against the alleged principals of record.

With jurisdiction thus vested in the trial court under the bill of the Chicago Real Estate Loan & Trust Company, the authority to entertain the application for injunctional relief against the subsequent suit of the appellant George F. Harding clearly appears, as we...