The Washington herald., 1914-04-11
SPORTS
Michigan Judge Refuses to
Grant Injunction, but
Scores the Player.
RESERVE CLAUSE INVALID

Grand Rapids. Mich. April I0-Judge
c. w. Sessions. in the United States Dis
trict Court. filed an opinion today in the
case of Charles Weeghman and William
Walker. doing business under the name
of the Chicago Federal League Baseball
Club. against WilliaI killifer and the
Philadelphia National League club. deny
ing an injunction restraining Killifer
from playing with Philadelphia ar in
validating the famous reserve clause" !"
which has been the bulwark OF organized
baseball for many years.
This decision automatically decides the
case OF the Federal League against Bland
ing and Kahler. Of the Cleveland Ameri-
cans, and Baumgardner and Williams, OF
the st. Louis Americans.
The Federals lost the case on the
ground that they came into court with
out "clcan hands" and, therefore, were
not entitled to an Injunction.
In his decision Judge Sessions. after
paying his respects to the playing ability
of KillifeT, says:
Unfortunately the records show that
he is a person upon whose pledged word
little or no reliance can be placed.
He neither hesitates nor scruples to
disregard and violate his express engage
ments and agreements for gain to him
self. His reputation of one contract for
the making of which he had been paid
several hundred dollars, and his breach
Of another contract entered into after
at least a weeks consideration and de-
liberation. gave rise TO the present con-
troversy.
View from the standpoint of common
honesty and integrity. his position in this
case is an unenviable one.
Injunction Is Denied.
THE motion of an injunction must
be denied. not because the eXecutory part
of the 1913 contract between the defend
ants was of superior or any legal force
and effect. not because the contract he
tween the plaintiffs and Killifer is not in
itself such as the courts will enforce, not
because there are any equities in KILL
fer's favor which excuses or exempt him
from the performance of his engage
ment, and not because the merits of the
controversy are with the Philadelphia
club. but solely because the action and
conduct of the plaintiffs in procuring the
contract upon which their right to relief
is. and must be founded. do not square
with one Of the vital and fundamental
principles of equity which touches to the
quick the dignity of the courts con-
science and controls its decision regard
less of all other considerations"
In dealing with the reserve clause,
Judge Sessions said:
The leading authorities are agreed
that eNecutory contracts of this nature
can neither be enforced in equity or
form the basis of action at law to re-
cover damages for their breach. The
reason for the decision is that such con-
tracts are lacking in the necessary quail
titles Of -definitencss. certainty and rnu-
tuality. The 1913 contract between KILL
fer and the Philadelphia Nationals. rel
ative TO the reserve clause of the de-
fendant, killifer. for the season of 1914 is
lacking in all these essential elements.
II is wholly uncertain and indefinite with
respect to salary and also with respect
to terms and conditions of proposed en-
ployment 1t is nothing more than a
contract TO enter into a contract in the
future il the parties can then agree to
contract.
The Tcn-tlny Clause.
Although it is founded upon sufficient
it lacks mutually, because
the Philadelphia club may terminate it at
any time upon ten days notice while the
other party has no option and is bound
during the entire contract period. \ con-
tract exists. but II broken by either party
the other is remedyless because the courts
are helpless either TO enforce its per-
formance or TO award damage for its
breach.
Are the plaintiffs in court with clean
hands? Knowing that the defendant Kill
lifer was under moral. IL not a legal,
obligation to the Philadelphia club for
the season of 1914. they sent for him. and
by offering him a larger term of employ
ment and much larger compensation
induced him to repudatc his obligation TO
his employers. In doing so. a wilIful
wrong was done to the Philadelphia
club.
Can, it be doubted that, il the plain
tifs had not interfcred. Mr. KilllfCr
would have carried out his agreement
with the Philadelphia club in honesty and
good faith?
THE conduct of both is not only open
TO criticism and censure. but is tainted
with unfairness and injustice, If not With
actionable fraud"