Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1912-07-05
HOOKER, CORSER & MITCHELL co. WIN
Masters Report Sweeping Victory for Brateboro Concern in
Big Overall Case-Corser Took 1876 Letters and Documents From
Company's Files
Company's Files

expectation OF the recovery VI iaiSe
damages has been won by the Hooker,
Corser e. Mitchell company of this town,
overall manufacturers, of which william
II. Proctor Is the head, against James
f. Hooker, w. II. Corser and G. ID.
Whitaker of Schenectady, N. Y. The
victory is contained in the report of M.
c. Weber of Rutland, special master In
the case, which was filed Friday. Inc
report is voluminous, covering 63 type
written pages, but the findings are
stated in language which cannot be
misunderstood, and on nearly every
point the position taken by the Brattle-
boro concern is sustained. Mr.. Proctor
and his associates in the Hooker, Cor
ser & Mitchell company scarcely could
hope for a more favorable report, and
it's moral effect, aside from all other
considerations, will be far-reachlng.
This case, which is of great local inter-
est will now go to the county court on
the question of damages
When Colonel Hooker and the late b.
G.. Corser died in the early fall of 1902,
thus bringing to an end the partnership
between Hooker and Corser and w. c.
Mitchell, who had been operating the
overall business up to that time, corpo-
ration was formed under the name of the
Hooker, Corser d Mitchell company and
the whole property and the stock in the
corporation was purchased by James f.
Corser, son of b. G.. Corser, c. ID. Whit
aker and w. II. Proctor, Proctor having
a quarter interest. A contract was made
between these four gentlemen as to how
the business should be managed and
carried on and which provided that each
of the four should be directors and the
business should be practically managed
by Whitaker, Corser and Proctor,
though Hooker was nominally president.
The business was highly successful
and continued with this management I'M
til the early part of January, 1909, when
an attempt was made by Hooker, Corser
| and Whitaker to Gust Proctor from par
| ticipaton in the management of the bus
| mess. They employed w. II, Brooks of
| Holyoke and later w. b. G. Stickney of
| Bethel and Attorney General Sargent Of
| Ludlow and acting under the advice of
| counsel, undertook to pass bylaws and
| elect directors, leaving Mr.. Proctor off
| the board.
Up to this time Mr.. Proctor had been
very active in the management of the
| business and as developed in the trial
was a dominating force in it. The trade
| of the company had increased, the busi-
ness had grown and large dividends had
been earned and paid. When this move
| to GUST him came, Mr.. Proctor brought
| suit in equity to compel recognition
of the contract made when the company
|
right to participate in the management
| of the business. An injunction was
| granted and Mr.. Proctor re-entered the
| office of the company.
There was acute feeling between the
parties pending this litigation during the
early months of 1909 In April of that
| year, Hooker Corser and Whitaker went
to Schenectady, N. Y, and began nego-
tiations for the purchase of a site tc
| erect an overall factory there. Proctor
learned of this and some time in May
brought a supplemental bill in equity
alleging that Hooker, Corser and Whit.
aker were undertaking to wrong the cor
poration and take its business away II
order to injure Proctor.
An injunction was granted on thi:
supplemental bill and motion made by
defendants to dissolve the injunction ant
hearing set for May 49, 1909, at Rutland
before Judge Butler. On that day set
Element was reached between the par
ties providing that Hooker Corser ant
J Whitaker should make a give or taxi
proposition on the sale of their stock o
the purchase of Proctor's stock within
ten days, Proctor having the option
whether to purchase or sell. The prc
fixed was SITS a share. Proctor elected
to purchase and did purchase all tn
stock of the other parties, paying 1857,
500 for it. Then he took into the com
|
Judge ]. l.. Martin, w. c. Mitchell AM
C. c. FittsI Mr.. Proctor was chosel
president, Mr.. Brown treasurer and the
with the other gentlemen, directors, an
the business has continued since.
Immediately after Proctor took thei
stock, Hooker, Corser and Whitaker lie
: 1t be known that they were planning t
go ahead with the Schenectady deal o
their own account and they took owe
to themselves the Schenectady Ian
which had been bargained for an
bought and began the erection of a
overall factory at Schenectady and or
ganized a company known as the Mo
hawk Overall company and employee
, | four of the most important statesmen c
! | the Hooker Corser & Mitchell compan
and its chief cutter, foreman, super
intendent and chief shipping clerk an
: | numerous other employees, and shortl
afterwards began the manufacture
: overalls in Schenectady. in sharp com
! petition with the Brattleboro concern
? In October of that year the Hooker, Coz
/ | ser & Mitchell company brought the su
:, on which the report of special maste
Weber has just been filed. In the su
1t was alleged that the defendant
. Hooker. Corser and Whitaker, were guilt
of six distinct and separate wrongfi
| acts.
% That Hooker, Corser and Whit
aKer mad employed BrookS, Stlckney
and Sargent as their personal coun-
sci in their litigation with Proctor,
in which Proctor had secured his
injunction, and that they had paid
these lawyers out of the company's
funds, which they had no right to
do.
(2) That there had been some lit
igation carried on In the name of
and for the benefit of Mr.. Corser as
executor Of his fathers estate in re-
gard to a patent buckle, in which
Mr.. Corser had been defeated and
which had cost about $4700, and that
the defendants. after Proctor had
been shut out from the management
of the company had permitted Cor
ser to charge this account off as an
expense of the company, when, as 1t
was claimed, It property should have
been paid by Corser; and also that
Mr. Corser had taken 5000 royalty
fee for the use of the patent from
the treasury of the company for one
year, which he had no right to take.
go That while the defendants were
still managing the company they
made certain contracts for cloth
and when Proctor bought the stock,
they had taken those contracts over
to themselves.
(D That while the defendants had
been in control of the company, In
the spring OF 1909, they had made
this deal at Schenectady whereby