Craft v. McConoughy
Citations
- 79 Ill. 346
Syllabus
<p>1. Contract—when in restraint of trade, is void, on the ground of public policy. A contract entered into by the grain dealers of a town, which, on its face, indicates that they have formed a partnership for the purpose of dealing in grain, but the true object of which is to form a secret combination, which would stifle all competition, and enable the parties, by secret and fraudulent means, to control the price of grain, costs of storage and expense of shipment at such town, is in restraint of trade, and consequently void on the ground of public policy.</p> <p>2. Equity—will not aid a division of the profits of an illegal transaction between associates. Where parties have entered into a contract in restraint of trade, and therefore contrary to public policy, a court of equity will not lend its aid to require an account of profits and a division thereof, although the contract has been executed.</p>
Judges: Craig
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
40 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- United States v. Trenton Potteries Co.Supreme Court· 1927-02-21· cited 493×
- Richardson v. BuhlMichigan Supreme Court· 1889-11-15· cited 70×
- Brown & Allen v. Jacobs' Pharmacy Co.Supreme Court of Georgia· 1902-04-30· cited 52×
- Hanover Nat. Bank of New York v. First Nat. Bank of BurlingameEighth Circuit· 1901-05-06· cited 52×
- More v. BennettIllinois Supreme Court· 1892-01-18· cited 42×
- Chicago Gas Light & Coke Co. v. People's Gas Light & Coke Co.Illinois Supreme Court· 1887-09-26· cited 38×
- Bishop v. American Preservers' Co.Illinois Supreme Court· 1895-04-01· cited 35×
- Bailey v. Master PlumbersTennessee Supreme Court· 1899-08-15· cited 35×
- Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati & Indianapolis Railway Co. v. ClosserIndiana Supreme Court· 1890-12-17· cited 34×
- Samuels v. OliverIllinois Supreme Court· 1889-10-31· cited 33×
- Board of Commissioners v. TaylorIndiana Supreme Court· 1890-02-04· cited 32×
- Nester v. Continental Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1894-05-14· cited 27×
- State ex rel. Cates v. Standard Oil Co. of KentuckyTennessee Supreme Court· 1907-12-15· cited 26×
- Central Shade Roller Co. v. CushmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1887-01-10· cited 25×
- State v. Nebraska Distilling Co.Nebraska Supreme Court· 1890-05-28· cited 25×
- Reeves v. Decorah Farmer's Cooperative SocietySupreme Court of Iowa· 1913-04-10· cited 23×
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Burlington & Southwestern Ry. Co.U.S. District Court· 1882-01-15· cited 23×
- Kennedy v. LonabaughWyoming Supreme Court· 1911-10-06· cited 17×
- Brelsford v. StollAppellate Court of Illinois· 1940-03-07· cited 16×
- Ches. & Ohio Ry. Co. v. Maysville Brick Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1909-03-10· cited 14×
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.