Milwaukee American Ass'n v. Landis, 9871.

• Decision Date: 21 April 1931
• Docket Number: No. 9871.,9871.
• Citation: 49 F.2d 298
• Parties: MILWAUKEE AMERICAN ASS'N et al. v. LANDIS (BENNETT, Intervener).
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois

49 F.2d 298 (1931)

MILWAUKEE AMERICAN ASS'N et al. v. LANDIS (BENNETT, Intervener).

No. 9871.

District Court, N. D. Illinois, E. D.

April 21, 1931.

Burry, Johnstone, Peters & Dixon, of Chicago, Ill., and Swarts, Reyburn & Kawin, of St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiffs.

David D. Stansbury, of Chicago, Ill., for intervener Bennett.

George W. Miller and Busby, Weber, Miller & Donovan, all of Chicago, Ill., for defendant.

LINDLEY, District Judge.

The original bill, filed by Milwaukee Association (herein termed the Milwaukee Club), sought to enjoin defendant, as commissioner of organized baseball, from disapproving an optional contract between the St. Louis American League (herein termed the St. Louis Club) and said plaintiff, assigning to Milwaukee a then existing agreement between the intervener, Bennett, as player, and the St. Louis Club, as owner, but reserving the right to recall Bennett to St. Louis. By stipulation of the parties, application for injunction was not pressed, and Bennett was allowed to play with Milwaukee until the end of its season. In September, 1930, he was returned to St. Louis, and the amended supplemental bill was filed with the St. Louis Club as additional plaintiff. In that bill plaintiffs seek to restrain the commissioner from interfering with the relation between Bennett and plaintiffs or either of them or with Bennett's contract with St. Louis and any assignment thereof previously or subsequently made. The commissioner answered that his action and what he proposed to do, if not enjoined, are clearly within his authority and in accord with the contracts and rules governing organized baseball. Bennett intervened, insisting that the commissioner is justified in his position and asserting that, because of plaintiffs' actions, he (Bennett) should be relieved of his contract relationships with them.

The code governing organized baseball is made up of: (1) The Major League agreement between the two Major Leagues and their sixteen constituent clubs; (2) Major League rules in code form, duly adopted, binding upon all of the Major League Clubs; (3) Major-Minor League agreement between the two Major Leagues on the one part and the National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues, otherwise known as the Minor Leagues, on the other part; (4) Major-Minor League rules; (5) National Association agreement, that is, the contract between all of the official Minor Leagues included within the National Association.

Plaintiff St. Louis Club is a member of the American Major League. All other clubs herein concerned belong to official Minor Leagues.

Under the Major League agreement the office of commissioner was created, and his functions were defined as follows:

"(a) To investigate, either upon complaint or upon his own initiative, any act, transaction or practice charged, alleged or suspected to be detrimental to the best interests of the national game of baseball; with authority to summon persons and to order the production of documents; and, in case of refusal to appear or produce, to impose such penalties as are hereinafter provided.

"(b) To determine, after investigation, what preventive, remedial or punitive action is appropriate in the premises, and to take such action either against Major Leagues, Major League Clubs or individuals, as the case may be."

He was given jurisdiction to hear and determine finally any disputes between leagues and clubs or to which a player might be a party, certified to him, and authorized, in case of "conduct detrimental to baseball," to impose punishment and pursue appropriate legal remedies; to determine finally a disagreement over any proposed amendment to the rules; and "to take such other steps as he might deem necessary and proper in the interest and morale of the players and the honor of the game." Optional agreements with players were defined and assignments thereof required to be filed with, and approved by, the commissioner. The parties agreed to abide by the decisions of the latter and the discipline imposed by him under the agreement and severally waived right of recourse to the courts. Similar covenants appear in the Major-Minor agreement, the National Association agreement and the uniform contracts with players.

The Major-Minor League agreement recognizes the office of commissioner and the jurisdiction aforesaid and provides that, in case of any dispute between any Major club and any Minor club, the disputants may certify the dispute to the commissioner for decision, and that his determination shall be final.

The various agreements and rules, constituting a complete code for, or charter and by-laws of, organized baseball in America, disclose a clear intent upon the part of the parties to endow the commissioner with all the attributes of a benevolent but absolute despot and all the disciplinary powers of the proverbial pater familias.

Bennett, in July, 1926, being under contract to play for Little Rock, was by it assigned to the Tulsa Club (class "a" of the Minors), with whom he played the remainder of 1926 and all of 1927. On April 5, 1928, Tulsa, with the approval of the commissioner, assigned its agreement with Bennett to St. Louis, and Bennett signed a contract with the latter for 1928. On May 10, 1928, St. Louis assigned this contract to Tulsa under an optional agreement, approved by the commissioner, retaining the right to recall Bennett. On May 25, 1928, St. Louis, having previously requested waivers of all other Major clubs, as required by the rules, canceled the reserved right to claim Bennett. The commissioner thereupon notified the National Association that St. Louis had canceled its option. On May 11, 1928, Bennett signed a contract to play with Tulsa for the remainder of 1928. On September 10, 1928, Tulsa assigned this contract to the Milwaukee Club (class "aa" of the Minors).

On December 5, 1928, Milwaukee, having previously obtained waivers from the seven other clubs of its league — the American Association — assigned its contract with Bennett to the Wichita Falls Club (class "a," Minor League) for $4,500, and Bennett signed a contract with that club for 1929. On September 6, 1929, Pittsburgh offered Wichita Falls $10,000 for Bennett and was advised by the latter that it had already submitted a proposition to St. Louis upon the player and that, if St. Louis did not take him, it would take the matter up further with Pittsburgh. On September 10, 1929, Wichita Falls assigned Bennett's contract to St. Louis for $5,000. In January, 1930, St. Louis requested from all other Major League clubs waivers upon their right to claim the services of Bennett. The New York American Club and the Pittsburgh Club each claimed him and offered St. Louis $7,500 for its contract. St. Louis did not accept the offer of either of the claiming clubs and on or about January 30, 1930, withdrew its request for waivers. On March 9, 1930, Bennett signed a contract with St. Louis for 1930. On April 7, 1930, St. Louis executed an optional agreement, assigning the player to Milwaukee, but reserving an option upon him. This contract was forwarded to the commissioner's office for approval, and was received by him on April 9, 1930. On April 10, 1930, Bennett signed a contract with Milwaukee for 1930 and finished the season there under the stipulation of the parties hereinbefore mentioned.

Upon receipt of the copy of the optional assignment by St. Louis to Milwaukee, the commissioner instituted an investigation of the stock holdings of Ball, president and principal stockholder of the St. Louis Club, in various Minor League clubs and on June 19, 1930, notified St. Louis and Milwaukee that he disapproved the assignment of Bennett to Milwaukee; that Bennett should be returned to St. Louis, which must either retain him as a Major League player for the year or longer, transfer him outright to some club not controlled or owned by St. Louis or its owners or release him unconditionally. Milwaukee then filed its original bill herein, and after the completion of the season, Bennett returned to St. Louis upon its recall, and the latter and Milwaukee filed the amended supplemental bill.

On September 3, 1930, St. Louis asked for waivers on Bennett, and Pittsburgh claimed his services, whereupon St. Louis withdrew its request for waivers. The offer of the Pittsburgh Club at that time was $7,500.

The investigation of the commissioner disclosed that Mr. Ball, since February 16, 1928, by reason of stock ownership and otherwise, has completely controlled the clubs of St. Louis, Tulsa and Wichita Falls and that since July, 1927, he has owned 50 per cent. of the stock of the Milwaukee Club and since January 19, 1929, completely controlled that club.

The commissioner on June 19, 1930, after stating the facts, said that it was clear that, between the time of his "outright" transfer to St. Louis and his reacquisition by that club, the player had had two seasons of Minor League services with clubs controlled by Ball, during which time the St. Louis Club could at any time have reacquired him (because of such control) just as effectively as if it had retained an option upon him. Notwithstanding these facts, he observed, St. Louis proposed to transfer Bennett for the third successive season to a Minor club without securing Major League waivers. The commissioner concluded that Bennett, whose services had been at all times subject to the one club owner's control, through...