Wigoda v. Cousins

Decision Date12 September 1973
Docket NumberNo. 58096,58096
PartiesPaul T. WIGODA et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. William COUSINS et al., Defendants-Appellants.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

Robert L. Tucker, John R. Schmidt, Wayne W. Whalen, Chicago, for defendants-appellants.

Jerome H. Torshen, Earl L. Neal, Chicago, for plaintiffs-appellees; Jerome H. Torshen, Ltd., Chicago, of counsel.

DIERINGER, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order entered in the Circuit Court of Cook County on July 8, 1972, enjoining and restraining the defendants herein from participating as delegates representing certain congressional districts in the State of Illinois at the 1972 Democratic National Convention which was convened in Miami, Florida, on July 10, 1972. Defendants also appeal from another order entered in the Circuit Court of Cook County on August 2, 1972, enjoining and restraining them from participating in a caucus of the Illinois delegation to the Democratic National Convention in order to elect the Illinois representatives to the Democratic National Committee.

The issues presented for review are: (1) whether the trial judge's assertion of jurisdiction over this matter contradicted the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, 409 U.S. 1201, 92 S.Ct. 2610, 34 L.Ed.2d 15, if they were binding and res judicata as to the issues in this case; (2) whether the trial court's action violated fundamental constitutional rights of free political association of the defendants and the National Democratic Party; (3) whether courts of equity have jurisdiction over political controversies; and, (4) whether the trial judge's public comments in this action display a gross bias against the defendants.

Pursuant to those provisions of the Illinois Election Code dealing with the making of nominations by political parties (Ill.Rev.Stat., ch. 46, § 7--1 et seq.), a primary election was held in the State of Illinois on March 21, 1972. At this primary election, delegates and alternate delegates to the National Nominating Convention of both the Democratic and Republican parties were elected from each of the 24 congressional districts in the State of Illinois.

The plaintiffs herein are a class of 59 individuals, including blacks, Latin Americans, women and persons between 18 and 30 years of age, who were elected in the March 21, 1972, primary election as uncommitted delegates to the National Democratic Convention from the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 11th congressional districts. Initially, it is worthy of mention that all the plaintiffs in this appeal were required by the Election Code to file on or before January 14, 1972, nominating petitions signed by at least one-half of one per cent of the qualified primary electors of the Democratic Party residing in their respective Districts, in order to have their names placed on the March 21, 1972, primary election ballot. No challenges to the plaintiffs' petitions were raised, and the primary election was held on March 21, 1972, resulting in the election of the plaintiffs by a majority of the qualified electors of the Democratic Party in their respective congressional districts. Thereafter, these results were canvassed, certified and reported in accordance with the respective provisions of the Election Code, culminating on April 18, 1972, in the proclamation of the Secretary of State that the plaintiffs herein were the elected delegates to the Democratic National Convention from their respective Congressional Districts.

The defendants herein were initially 10 individuals who filed a formal challenge of the credentials of the plaintiffs with the Acting Chairman of the Credentials Committee of the Democratic National Party on March 31, 1972. In their challenge the defendants allege the plaintiffs were not entitled to credentials for the Convention as they were in violation of certain guidelines which had been previously set forth in the Report of the Commission of Party Structure and Delegate Selection to the Democratic National Committee, which were thereafter incorporated into Article III, Part I, of the Call of the 1972 Democratic National Convention. Specifically, the defendants alleged in their challenge that the plaintiffs were first chosen as candidates and thereafter elected to be delegates and alternate delegates based on slate-making procedures which were neither open to the public nor had rules attached thereto to attract public participation. The defendants further alleged in their challenge that the plaintiffs were chosen to the exclusion of certain minorities, namely, blacks, Latin Americans, women, and persons between 18 and 30 years of age.

In view of the aforementioned challenge filed by the initial 10 defendants, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Cook County on April 19, 1972, the first day following the Secretary of State's proclamation naming the plaintiffs as the duly elected delegates to the Democratic National Convention and also, by operation of law, the first day which the plaintiffs could so act in their elective office. In this lawsuit, the plaintiffs sought to enjoin and restrain the defendants who had filed the challenge with the acting chairman of the Credentials Committee of the Democratic National Party. A motion for a preliminary injunction was set for April 21, 1972, before Judge Donald J. O'Brien. The hearing on this motion, however, was not held on April 21, 1972, because the defendants filed a petition in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois removing the cause to that court on April 20, 1972. There the cause was then assigned to Federal Judge Hubert Will. Thereafter, on April 24, 1972, the plaintiffs filed a motion with Judge Will to remand the cause to the Circuit Court of Cook County on the ground that the initial removal to the U.S. District Court was improper as there was no federal question involved. Judge Will took the motion to remand under advisement and on May 18, 1972, he issued an opinion finding no basis for federal jurisdiction, D.C., 342 F.Supp. 82. Judge Will, however, also entered a 10--day stay of his findings in order to enable the defendants to appeal therefrom. Subsequently the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit denied any further stays of Judge Will's finding and on June 30, 1972, dismissed the defendants' appeal on the ground that there was no basis for allowing the defendants' initial removal from the Circuit Court of Cook County to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

During the period between April 24, 1972, when the instant plaintiffs filed their motion to remand the original cause to the Circuit Court of Cook County, and May 18, 1972, when Judge Will entered his opinion finding no federal jurisdiction, the defendants herein commenced yet another action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. In that suit the defendants herein sought to enjoin the plaintiffs herein from any further prosecution of this action in the Circuit Court of Cook County as being violative of their First Amendment rights. That cause was assigned to Federal Judge Frank McGarr, who granted the instant defendants herein a series of non-reviewable temporary restraining orders which prevented any further action in the Circuit Court of Cook County, although such further action was contrary to Judge Will's findings wherein the cause was remanded to the Circuit Court of Cook County because there was no federal question, and the Federal Court therefore lacked jurisdiction. Finally, on June 9, 1972, Judge McGarr held a trial. At the conclusion of the trial a preliminary injunction was issued barring the defenants, who are the plaintiffs in the Circuit Court of Cook County, from proceeding with this action in the Circuit Court. The injunction issued by Judge McGarr was promptly appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, where a hearing was held on June 29, 1972. Following oral argument, the court, acting from the bench, reversed the injunction granted by Judge McGarr and ordered that its mandate issue forthwith so as not to delay any action in the Circuit Court of Cook County. Cousins v. Wigoda, 7 Cir., 463 F.2d 603.

In an attempt to stay this mandate from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, the instant defendants petitioned Justice William Rehnquist of the U.S. Supreme Court on July 1, 1972, for a stay order. Following the hearing, Mr. Justice Rehnquist denied the instant defendants' application for a stay, thus clearing the way for a continuation of this action in the Circuit Court of Cook County. At this point it is necessary to mention certain other situations which were transpiring during the course of the previously discussed litigation so as to cast full and proper perspective on the continuation of the instant litigation in the Circuit Court of Cook County from which this appeal arose. These other situations were the activities of the Credentials Committee of the Democratic National Party, and certain litigation which originated in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

As previously mentioned, on March 31, 1972, the original 10 defendants to this action filed a 'Notice of Intent to Challenge' with the acting chairman of the Credentials Committee of the 1972 Democratic National Convention. In this 'Notice' they stated their intent to challenge the seating of the 59 uncommitted delegates who are the plaintiffs in this action. Thereafter, these original 10 defendants filed a 'Statement of Grounds of Challenge Against the Proposed 'Uncommitted' Delegates to the 1972 Democratic National Convention from the Districts Encompassing the City of Chicago.' On May 26, 1972, almost two months after the 'Statement' was filed, Cecil F. Poole, a San Francisco attorney, was appointed as hearing...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Mohn v. Bucks County Republican Committee
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • September 22, 2021
    ...workings of a political party squarely within the protection of the First Amendment.").12 Significantly, in Wigoda v. Cousins , 14 Ill.App.3d 460, 302 N.E.2d 614 (1973), an Illinois appellate court cited Bentman and the New York Court of Appeals’ decision in Coffey , upon which Bentman reli......
  • State ex rel. La Follette v. Democratic Party of U.S. of America
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • January 19, 1980
    ...to participate in primaries is superior to whatever other interests the party itself might wish to protect . . . ." 14 Ill.App.3d 460, 472, 475, 302 N.E.2d 614 (1973); quoted in Cousins, 419 U.S. at 481-482, 95 S.Ct. at The United States Supreme Court concluded in Cousins that the state's i......
  • Cousins v. Wigoda 8212 1106
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • January 15, 1975
    ...and the Party's right to determine the composition of its National Convention in accordance with Party standards. Pp. 487—491. 14 Ill.App.3d 460, 302 N.E.2d 614, Wayne W. Whalen, Chicago, Ill., for petitioners. Jerome H. Torshen, Chicago, Ill., for respondents. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered......
  • Ferency v. Austin
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan
    • April 21, 1980
    ...Delegation's prior appeal. The Illinois Court of Appeals thereafter upheld the legitimacy of the lower court's injunction, 14 Ill.App.3d 460, 302 N.E.2d 614 (1973), and leave to appeal was denied by the Illinois Supreme Court. In its opinion, the Illinois appellate court said, at page 626, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Political Parties Before the Bar: the Controversy Over Associational Rights
    • United States
    • Seattle University School of Law Seattle University Law Review No. 5-03, March 1982
    • Invalid date
    ...Id. at 759. 27. 414 U.S. 51 (1973). 28. Id. at 58. 29. 419 U.S. 477 (1975). 30. Id. at 479. 31. Wigoda v. Cousins, 14 111. App. 3d 460, 302 N.E.2d 614 (1973). 32. 419 U.S. at 489-90 (1973). 33.450 U.S. 107 (1981). 34.Id. at 109-13. 35.Id. at 113-14. 36.Id. at 120. 37.Id. at 126. 38.See Ray ......
  • Smothering Freedom of Association: the Alaska Supreme Court Errs in Upholding the State's Blanket Primary Statute
    • United States
    • Duke University School of Law Alaska Law Review No. 14, January 1997
    • Invalid date
    ...right to participate in primaries is superior to whatever other interests the party itself might wish to protect." Wigoda v. Cousins, 302 N.E.2d 614, 626, 629 (Ill. App. Ct. 1973). The Supreme Court reversed, finding that this position violated the associational rights of the latter group o......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT