Purington v. Hinchliff

• Decision Date: 20 December 1905
• Citation: 76 N.E. 47,219 Ill. 159
• Parties: PURINGTON et al. v. HINCHLIFF.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

219 Ill. 159

76 N.E. 47

PURINGTON et al.

v.HINCHLIFF.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 20, 1905.

Appeal from Appellate Court, First District.

Action by George Hinchliff against D. V. Purington and others. From a judgment of the Appellate Court, affirming a judgment for plaintiff, certain defendants aplpeal. Affirmed.George W. Plummer and Wharton Plummer, for apkpellants.

Edwin F. Abbott, for appellee.

This was an action on the case, commenced in the circuit court of Cook county by George Hinchliff against D. V. Purington. William W. Weckler, Adam J. Weckler, Frederick La Bahn, Louis Reimer, Charles Harmes, William Schlake, P. J. Sexton, Edward T. Harland, J. C. Thompson, and the Masons' & Builders' Association. The substantial allegations of plaintiff's declaration, after various amendments, are: ‘That for six years prior to the committing of the grievances complained of, plaintiff was a manufacturer and dealer in bricks, and was the owner and possessed of certain lands and buildings at Hobart, Ind., which were in use by him as such manufacturer, and which had been acquired and equipped for said business of manufacturing brick at an expenditure of $50,000; that during said period the plaintiff was engaged in the manufacture of brick and selling the same almost exclusively in Cook county, Ill., and was in receipt of large profits, and especially from having a market for said brick in said Cook county; that during said time the Chicago Masons' & Builders' Association was a corporation in said Cook county, and had among its members about two-thirds of all persons and firms then engaged in said county in the business of constructing brick and mason work and in purchasing and obtaining supplies of brick to be used in said county; that the membership of said corporation comprised substantially all the responsible and reliable persons or firms engaged in the business aforesaid in said Cook county; that during said period the members of said association constructed 95 per cent. of the brick and mason work in said county, and plaintiff made sales of substantially all of the brick of his manufacture,and all that could be manufactured at his said plant, to members of said association, from which he derived profits of $10,000 per year; that the defendant J. C. Thompson is and was a member and president of said association; that during said period there was in said county a voluntary organization of individuals known as the Brick Manufacturers' Association of Chicago, comprising 95 per cent. of the manufacturers of brick in said county; that the members of said association were manufacturers of and dealers in and sellers of brick in said county; that the defendants D. V. Purington, William H. Weckler, Adam J. Weckler, Frederick, W. La Bahn, Louis Reimer, P. J. Sexton, Edward T. Harland, Charles Harmes, and William Schlake were during said period, and still are, members of said association and engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling brick; that during said period there was in said county a voluntary association known as the Bricklayers' Union, comprising 98 per cent. of the competent bricklayers of said county; that, while the plaintiff was lawfully conducting his business as a manufacturer of and dealer in brick, the defendants, wrongfully and unlawfully conspiring, etc., to injure the plaintiff in his business and to deprive him of the legitimate profits thereof, wrongfully and corruptly conspired and agreed among themselves, and caused to be agreed by said Masons' & Builders' Association and the members thereof, that such members should not purchase, nor be permitted to purchase, any brick to be used by them, or any of them, from any person, firm, or corporation except such as had subscribed to the rules and regulations of said Masons' & Builders' Association, to which said rules and regulations the plaintiff was under no obligations to subscribe; that said Bricklayers' Union wrongfully and corruptly took action assuming to bind and pledge its members not to handle or lay any brick manufactured by any person who had not subscribed to the rules and regulations of said Masons' & Builders' Association, which said action or pledge was accepted and acted upon by the members of said union and defendants; that after the making of said agreements and pledges, and with the unlawful purpose of injuring, etc., the plaintiff's business and of preventing and precluding him from conducting his said business in Cook county with profit, the defendants procured persons to go to customers of plaintiff and to attend at the places where brick of the plaintiff were bought to be used in constructing buildings in said county, and then and there wrongfully represented to the said customers and said workmen employed to lay and work with brick of the plaintiff that, if said customers should purchase or said workmen use brick manufactured by plaintiff, such customers and workmen would be prevented from completing or proceeding with any building or structure upon which it was proposed to use the brick of plaintiff; that in furtherance of their unlawful conspiracy in that behalf the defendants have, by wrongful threats and the imposition of fines upon persons dealing in or using the brick of plaintiff in said county, prevented sundry customers of plaintiff from purchasing brick from plaintiff and from completing contracts in which such brick would have been used, and have prevented workmen from laying or using plaintiff's brick, and have made wrongful and malicious threats, whereby customers of plaintiff have been deterred from buying or using plaintiff's brick; that by means of said several agreements and said wrongful, unlawful, and malicious acts and interference of the defendants and the aforesaid unlawful conspiracy in that behalf, the plaintiff has been wholly deprived of the sales of brick in said county which he otherwise would have had, and has been and is unable to dispose of and sell his brick in said county, and has lost and been deprived of divers large gains and profits, etc., and by means of the premises the business of the plaintiff has been greatly damaged and rendered less profitable and the value of his lands and buildings greatly depreciated, to the damage of the plaintiff in the sum of $100,000.’Plaintiff also filed a specific bill of particulars, in which he set forth various alleged acts of defendants in furtherance of the unlawful combination and conspiracy as above charged in the declaration. The defendants filed their plea of not guilty, and upon a trial before the court and a jury a verdict was returned for $22,000. The suit was subsequently dismissed as to William Schlake, and judgment rendered upon the verdict against the other defendants, all of whom, except J. C. Thompson and the Masons' & Builders' Association, perfected their appeal to ...