People ex rel. Rusch v. Freedman
| Decision Date | 09 November 1938 |
| Docket Number | Gen. No. 39925. |
| Citation | 17 N.E.2d 332,297 Ill.App. 73 |
| Parties | PEOPLE EX REL. RUSCH v. FREEDMAN ET AL. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Cook County Court; Edward K. Jarecki, Judge.
Proceeding by the People of the State of Illinois, on the relation of John S. Rusch, against Max Freedman and others. From an order finding defendants guilty of misconduct and misbehavior as officers of the County Court of Cook County and of contempt of court while acting as judges and clerks of election at a primary election and sentencing them to jail, the defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Thomas Marshall, of Chicago, for appellants.
John F. Cashen, Jr., of Chicago, for appellee.
This is an appeal by the defendants from an order entered by the court on August 3, 1937, finding the defendants guilty of misconduct and misbehavior as officers of the County Court of Cook County and of contempt of court while acting as judges and clerks of election at a primary held on April 14, 1936, in the 47th Precinct, of the 20th Ward in Chicago, County of Cook and State of Illinois, and sentencing Max Freedman and Jack Werner for contempt of court to one year in the county jail, and Henry Lieberman to six months in the county jail.
A verified petition was filed by the Chief Clerk of the Board of Election Commissioners of the City of Chicago, from which it appears that on April 14, 1936, a primary election was held in the City of Chicago, County of Cook and State of Illinois, for the nomination by the chief political parties of candidates for office to be voted for on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of said year, and for other purposes as prescribed by law.
It also appears that certain misconduct and misbehavior therein alleged of the said defendants as such judges and clerks of said primary election, constituted contempt of court, and it further appears from the allegations of the petition that the defendants, while serving and acting as judges and clerks of said election in said precinct, did knowingly, fraudulently and unlawfully make a false canvass, tally, proclamation and return of the votes cast in said precinct, and also unlawfully permitted persons to vote more than once, and further permitted persons not qualified to vote and persons to vote whose names had been erased as registered voters at said primary.
It further appears from the petition that the defendants permitted persons not registered to vote, recorded the names of persons who did not vote, gave assistance to voters not needing assistance, permitted one judge of election to go into the booth with a voter, permitted liquor in the polling place, and also allowed persons to handle ballots other than the defendants, and permitted persons to alter ballots, and thereby were guilty of corrupt and fraudulent conduct as judges of election in said precinct.
By the petition the court was requested to enter an order and rule commanding the defendants to appear in court at the time designated in said order.
Thereafter, on April 19, 1937, the defendants filed a petition and affidavit for a change of venue, in which they recited they feared they would not receive a fair trial in the said court because the judge thereof was prejudiced against them, which knowledge came to them April 15, 1937. The motion for a change of venue was denied. A further motion of the defendants to srike the petition and affidavit was considered by the court and denied.
It appears from the evidence that on April 14, 1936, about six o'clock A. M. the only precinct official who appeared for duty was Elsa Nye, a judge. As voters came in to vote she solicited Max Freedman and Lieberman and Werner to act as judges of election, and she swore them in as judges on the morning in question.
There is evidence in the record of witnesses who appeared and cast their ballots, assisted by officials of the Election Board, and from the testimony of these witnesses one of the judges went into the booth with them for the purpose of aiding them in casting their ballots.
George Factor and James Gold were called as witnesses. They testified they attended the primary election on the day in question as watchers, and during the course of their presence at this polling place they made a memorandum of what took place, and used the memorandum in making a report of the occurrences, which was delivered to a Mr. McQueeny, who had hired them for the purpose of making a note of the occurrences at the polling place while they were present as watchers; that they were required to rewrite their reports in order that they might receive the compensation promised them for the day's work. At the close of their evidence the court, as to one of the witnesses, commented that they were unable to get anywhere with the witness and the court thought he was shielding someone and had merely written a fictitious report to get paid for it. At the conclusion of the hearing the attorney, Mr. Cashen, who represented the Board of Election Commissioners as special attorney, made this statement:
There is evidence in the record that upon an examination of the poll books and registers it appears that ballots were cast more than once by or in the names of the following persons:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People ex rel. Rusch v. Levin
...case upon a petition for leave to appeal the Supreme Court denied an appeal, so that the decision is final. Also People ex rel. Rusch v. Freedman, 297 Ill.App. 73, 17 N.E.2d 332;People ex rel. Rusch v. Sulli, 296 Ill.App. 639, 16 N.E.2d 174 (Abstract) were cases in which the question of cha......
-
People ex rel. Rusch v. Cunningham
...Rusch v. Savaiano, 293 Ill.App. 515, 13 N.E.2d 81;People ex rel. Rusch v. Sulli, 296 Ill.App. 639, 16 N.E.2d 174;People ex rel. Rusch v. Freedman, 297 Ill.App. 73, 17 N.E.2d 332, and People ex rel. Rusch v. Levin, 305 Ill.App. 142, 26 N.E.2d 895. Thereafter, respondents made a motion for th......