Gilbert informed building managers, who inquired of him, that appellant was connected with hoodlums.Īppellant is a Delaware corporation formed for the purpose of creating diversity of citizenship so as to maintain this suit. The District Court referred the hearing of the cause to a special master who concluded *828 that a conspiracy existed between all appellees except Courtney whereby the union refused to furnish appellant with men because of appellant's price cutting *829 practices, which it believed would hurt the members of the scavenger association to such an extent that they would be unable to continue the wage agreement with the union that the picketing of buildings serviced by appellant was not peaceful picketing within the terms of the Norris-La Guardia Act (29 U.S.C.A. union, the State's Attorney, and his chief investigator) to hinder and prevent *827 appellant from carrying on a scavenger business in Chicago. The District Court made findings of fact and conclusions of law (summarized in the margin ) finding no evidence to support appellant's charge that *826 a conspiracy existed between appellees (a scavenger association, the local of an A. This appeal is from a decree dismissing, for want of equity, appellant's bill for injunction and for other relief against appellees. Ross, all of Chicago, Ill., for appellees.īefore EVANS and SPARKS, Circuit Judges, and BALTZELL, District Judge. Struett, of Chicago, Ill., for appellant. Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.Īs Amended on Denial of Rehearing October 1, 1936.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |