Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Haralampopoulos v. Capital News Agency

APRIL 19, 1966.

ARGYRIOS HARALAMPOPOULOS, A/K/A ARTHUR HARRIS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

v.

CAPITAL NEWS AGENCY, INC., A CORPORATION, KNIGHT PUBLISHING CORP., A CORPORATION AND GO-GUYS, INC., A CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.



Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County, Law Division; the Hon. BEN SCHWARTZ, Judge, presiding. Judgment affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE LYONS DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE COURT.

Rehearing denied May 10, 1966.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered in favor of defendant, Capital News Agency, Inc., dismissing plaintiff's amended complaint. The remaining defendants were never served with summons and are not involved in this appeal.

Plaintiff's complaint alleges in substance the following:

1. That the plaintiff herein, Argyrios Haralampopoulos, also known as Arthur Harris, . . . is owner of the retail business, located at 5558 North Kedzie Avenue in the County of Cook and State of Illinois; that the said business is a liquor store, restaurant, tobacco shop, and also deals in selling magazines and newspapers.

2. That the said plaintiff operated and conducted the said business at said address for many years and during said period of time made large profits from the conduct of said business; that in connection with the operation of said retail liquor business it was necessary to secure a liquor license from and issued by the City of Chicago, a municipal corporation duly authorized by the statutes of the State of Illinois, . . . and that for many years the said business was conducted by virtue of a liquor license issued by the said City of Chicago, at the aforesaid address, up to and including November 29, 1963.

3. That Capital News Agency, Inc., a corporation, one of the defendants herein during all of the times herein mentioned was and is now engaged in the business of distributing magazines to retail merchants.

4. That Knight Publishing Corp., a corporation, one of the defendants herein during all of the times herein mentioned, was engaged in the business of printing and publishing magazines for profit.

5. That Go-Guys Company, Inc., a corporation, one of the defendants herein, during all the times herein mentioned, was engaged in the business of printing and publishing magazines for profit.

6. That during the year 1963, there was in full force and effect a certain ordinance duly enacted by the City of Chicago, the aforesaid municipality commonly referred to as Chapter 192, Section 9 of the Municipal Code of Chicago, in words and figures as follows:

"It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to exhibit, sell, print, offer to sell, give away, circulate, [sic] or attempt to distribute any obscene books, [sic] magazine, pamphlet, paper, writing [sic] card, advertisement, circular, print, picture, photograph, motion picture film, play, image, instrument, statue, drawing, or other article which is obscene. Any person violating any provisions of this section shall be fined not less than $20.00 nor more than $200.00 for each offense.

"Obscene for the purpose of this section is defined as follows: Whether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material as a whole appeals to purient [sic] interests."

and that the plaintiff and the aforesaid retail business was subject to the provisions thereof.

7. That during the year 1963, then and more particularly during the months of April, May, and June of said years, the defendants, Knight Publishing Corp., a corporation and Go-Guys Company, Inc., a corporation, respectively, sold and caused to be delivered certain magazines to Capital News Agency, Inc., a corporation, another defendant herein; and that said magazines were entitled Adam and Go Guys, respectively; that said defendants knew or by the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.