Peller v. International Boxing Club
| Decision Date | 13 May 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 52 C 813.,52 C 813. |
| Citation | 135 F. Supp. 942 |
| Parties | Barkey PELLER, Plaintiff, v. INTERNATIONAL BOXING CLUB, Inc., etc., et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
Seymour F. Simon and Sheldon O. Collen, Simon & Collen, Chicago, Ill., and John W. Wilke, Cincinnati, Ohio, for plaintiff.
Charles H. Watson, Lowell H. Jacobson, and Peabody, Westbrook, Watson & Stephenson, Chicago, Ill., for International Boxing Club, Inc., Chicago Stadium Corp., James D. Norris, Arthur M. Wirtz and Truman K. Gibson, Jr.
J. Arthur Friedlund, Chicago, Ill., and Benjamin C. Milner, III, Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett, New York City, for International Boxing Club of N. Y., Inc.
Vincent D. McConnell, Chicago, Ill., for Ray Robinson, George Gainford, Rocky Graziano, and Irving Cohen.
Affirmed 227 F.2d 593.
Plaintiff filed his complaint under Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 15, 26, to recover treble damages for alleged violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1, 2, and to restrain continuing violations. He charges that defendants acted in conspiracy to frustrate plaintiff's attempts at promotion of specific professional boxing matches and to prevent plaintiff from attaining the professional standing and reputation as a championship professional boxing promoter which he would have attained in a free competitive market.
The International Boxing Club of New York, Inc., a New York corporation, moved to dismiss the action on the ground of improper venue as to itself, as a foreign corporation not doing business in Illinois.
One defendant, Al Weill, was never served with process.
The remaining defendants moved for summary judgment in their favor on the ground that the facts alleged in the complaint itself, and in discovery depositions showed plaintiff not to be injured or damaged in his business or property by reason of the alleged unlawful acts of defendants, as it does not appear that plaintiff was either engaged in the business of Boxing Promoter or even that he was, as he contends, prepared to engage in that business and intended to do so.
Plaintiff's complaint and statements on deposition do show an intention to enter into and engage in the business of Boxing Promoter. However, it is uncontroverted that neither plaintiff, nor the Foundation For Boys, Inc., for whom plaintiff is alleged to have acted as agent, had ever been licensed as a Boxing Promoter; that the Rules of the Cincinnati Boxing and Wrestling Commission require a license to be procured from that Commission prior to participation in boxing; and that application was never made for such license by plaintiff or the Foundation For Boys, Inc.
It is plaintiff's contention that he was in process of negotiating contracts with boxers and their managers, had exchanged preliminary telegrams and long distance telephone calls, had made a trip to New York to discuss availability of one boxer, had prepared contracts for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Image and Sound Service Corp. v. Altec Service Corp.
...Westor Theatres v. Warner Bros. Pictures, D.C., 41 F.Supp. 757, 762. Most similar to this case factually is Peller v. International Boxing Club, D.C., 135 F.Supp. 942, affirmed, 7 Cir., 227 F.2d 593, 596, which held that the plaintiff could not recover under the Clayton Act on the ground th......
-
Duff v. Kansas City Star Company
...S.Ct. 38, 63 L. Ed. 123; Image and Sound Service Corp. v. Altec Service Corp., 148 F.Supp. 237 (D.C.Mass.); Peller v. International Boxing Club, Inc., 135 F.Supp. 942 (N.D.Ill.), aff. 227 F. (2d) 593 (Cir. Nevertheless, appellant argues that while he "* * * does not allege any large capital......
-
Broadcasters, Inc. v. Morristown Broadcasting Corp.
... ... Peller v. International Boxing Club, 7 Cir., 227 F.2d 593, 595 and 596; Image & ... ...
- Peller v. International Boxing Club, 11525.