Landretto v. First Trust & Sav. Bank of Chicago

• Citation: 164 N.E. 836,333 Ill. 442
• Decision Date: 07 February 1929
• Docket Number: No. 18647.,18647.
• Parties: LANDRETTO v. FIRST TRUST & SAVINGS BANK OF CHICAGO.
• Court: Supreme Court of Illinois

333 Ill. 442

164 N.E. 836

LANDRETTO

v.FIRST TRUST & SAVINGS BANK OF CHICAGO.

No. 18647.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 20, 1928.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 7, 1929.

Error to Appellate Court, Second District, on Appeal from Circuit Court Rock Island County; C. J. Searle, Judge.

Suit by Lizzie Landretto against Sam Landretto, the First Trust and Savings Bank of Chicago, and others, in which the first named defendant filed a cross-bill. A decree for complainant against defendant Trust & Savings Bank was affirmed by the Appellate Court, and the bank brings certiorari.

Reversed and remanded, with directions.

Farmer, J., dissenting.Marshall & Marshall, of Rock Island, for plaintiff in error.

Connelly, Weld, Walker, Searle & Crampton, of Rock Island (H. A. Weld, of Rock Island, of counsel), for defendant in error.

CROW, C.

Complainant, Lizzie Landretto, defendant in error here, filed a bill in the circuit court of Rock Island county in January, 1921, seeking a divorce from her husband, Sam Landretto, on the ground of extreme and repeated cruelty. He filed an answer denying the allegations of the bill, and filed a cross-bill, charging complainant with adultery. By her amended answer to the cross-bill she admitted that she had committed adultery and practiced prostitution, but averred it was with the knowledge and consent of her husband, and that he caused her to engage in such practices. Certain banks located in Rock Island and Chicago were made parties defendant because of the possession by them of bonds or money alleged to be the property of complainant and to which her husband claimed title. Upon trial by jury, verdicts were rendered on the original and cross-bills in favor of complainant, and a decree of divorce was entered. The cause was referred to a master in chancery to take and report the evidence, and his conclusions thereon, as to the ownership of certain bonds and as to a controversy concerning $2,500, originally on joint deposit in the First Trust & Savings Bank of Chicago. The master reported concerning the controversy between complainant and the bank, finding that the $2,500 on deposit in the bank in the name of Landretto had been withdrawn by him on January 4 and January 8, 1921, previous to the service of summons upon the bank; that all the money deposited was obtained by complainant and her husband in open violation of law, by the operation of houses of prostitution, and through her practices as a common prostitute; that courts of equity do not adjust differences or supervise accountings between wrongdoers, and the bank, therefore, should not be compelled to account to complainant for the money it paid out to the husband. Objections to the report of the master were overruled and stood as exceptions before the chancellor. The chancellor sustained the exceptions to the master's report, and entered a decree finding that all the deposits made in the bank were complainant's money; that the bank was so modified when the account was opened and the first savings deposit was made, and again at a later date; that the bank knew of the contemplated divorce action by complainant, and by its officer promised and agreed with her and her attorney to withhold the money, and not permit it to be withdrawn by Landretto for a period of 30 days succeeding December 29, 1920; that the bank violated its promise to hold the money, and paid to the husband the entire sum, except $1 on deposit in his name. A decree was entered that the First Trust & Savings Bank pay forthwith to complainant the sum of $2,500. From that decree it prosecuted an appeal to the Appellate Court for the Second District, which affirmed the decree. This court granted a writ of certiorari to review the judgment of the Appellate Court.

The material facts developed upon the hearing are, substantially: During June, 1914, Sam Landretto Took complainant, who was about 16 years of age, from her home in Chicago to Rock Island, placed her in a house of prostitution, and by threats, force, and inhuman treatment compelled her to live a life of shame and to give her earnings therefrom to him. She was an inmate of two or three places, and was later married to him to escape prosecutionafter one of the places had been raided. After their marriage, the criminal practices were continued by both parties. He operated a ‘jitney bus' for a while, and later they established and operated two or three different houses of prostitution, usually having some other business in the same building. The last place was operated about three years; the earnings of complainant and two girls employed in the place amounting to about $600 per month. She testified that Landretto always demanded and compelled the delivery to him of the money made from the place but the records of the American Trust & Savings Bank of Rock Island show that there was deposited in her name in that bank more than $4,300. He obtained the women for the house, and paid the rent and expenses out of the earnings. The place was known as that of complainant, and in such capacity she was once arrested and fined. She testified that Landretto had nothing and made no money over expenses, and that all the money saved by them was from prostitution. The money was deposited by him under different names, some of which were fictitious, in Rock Island banks, his purpose being to prevent the public authorities from knowing about his having the money.

From the money derived from prostitution, a savings account was opened in the First Trust & Savings Bank of Chicago. The original account, No. 340743, was arranged and a deposit of $2,000 made by complainant and her husband on January 12, 1920. The account was in the name of ‘Lizzie or Sam Landretto,’ and any or all of the account was payable to either, subject to the by-laws of the bank, one of which was, in substance, that the bank reserved the right to demand and receive 60 days' notice in writing as a condition of the withdrawal of all sums of $100 or more, and 30 days' written notice for the withdrawal of a lesser sum. The passbook or deposit book was required to be presented when withdrawal notice was given. Complainant testified that the bank officer was told, at the time of making the initial deposit, that the money was her property. Additional deposits were made during the following months of May and June, and an interest item was added in July, making the total account $5,535. All of the deposits were money accumulated from prostitution, and were the proceeds of the houses of prostitution conducted by complainant, as appears from her testimony. On or about August 18, 1920, complainant left her husband. She told him she was going to Chicago to see a doctor. She called at the plaintiff in error bank about that date, with the passbook, for the purpose of drawing out the savings account. The bank official to whom she applied for the money at first refused to pay her any of the money without her husband's signature, or unless he was present. However, the bank did pay her $2,000, and took her receipt therefor. She testified that she told the bank teller the money deposited belonged to her. The passbook was sent by messenger to complainant's brother, who lived in Chicago, and complainant went to Detroit. Some time later she moved to St. Louis, where she was staying at the time of the hearing of this cause. About August 20 her husband went to the bank, and...