APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Ogle County; the Hon. JOHN L.
MOORE, Judge, presiding.
MR. JUSTICE DIXON DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE COURT:
Rehearing denied May 13, 1975.
This interlocutory appeal is taken, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 307, from an order refusing to dissolve a temporary restraining order which had been entered by the Circuit Court of Ogle County against defendants.
The plaintiff, Kable Printing Company, has a plant located in Mount Morris, Illinois. The defendant Bookbinders Union and defendant Photoengravers Union are collective-bargaining representatives for some employees of Kable. Individual defendants are either officers or members of the unions. On or about May 10, 1974, members of the unions commenced a strike against Kable.
On August 27, 1974, plaintiff Kable filed a verified petition for injunction against all the defendants. At the same time a verified petition for a temporary restraining order was filed. This latter petition recited that notice of the petition had been served on the defendants by personal service together with a copy of the petition for injunction, summons, and notice of motion for temporary restraining order enjoining the defendants from engaging in conduct described in the complaint filed in the action. The allegations of the petition for injunction were incorporated by reference. (It, with exhibits, was 21 pages long.)
On August 28 a notice was personally served on all defendants except Russell Stonebreaker notifying them that on 29 August at 10 o'clock the plaintiff would seek a hearing on the petition for temporary restraining order. *fn1
Pursuant to the notice for hearing, counsel for plaintiff appeared in the courtroom at 10 A.M. on August 29, 1974. Shortly thereafter, attorneys Pomeranz and Allison arrived, Pomeranz announcing his appearance for defendant Bookbinders, their officers and members named in the petition. Allison announced his appearance for defendant Photoengravers, their officers and members named in the petition.
The judge conferred with all the attorneys for 4 or 5 hours and at the end of the day read his order in open court. No report of proceedings was taken, but it is significant to note that in part II of the order the court enjoined the plaintiff and its agents from certain conduct and also dismissed two charges of the complaint with leave to amend. In part III of the order the court required a bond of plaintiff. It is of further significance that in paragraph 5 of the order the court found:
"5. That it is in the best interest and safety of the general public that both parties be restrained from threatening, intimidating or coercing each other. The parties will suffer irreparable damage if a temporary restraining order is not granted."
The order of the judge was entitled "Order for Temporary Restraining Order" but was to "remain in full force and effect pending further order of this Court."
After entry of the order on August 30, bond having been approved on the 29th, injunction writs were issued and served on all defendants.
No motion to dissolve was ever made until December 2.
On September 25, certain defendants filed a motion to dismiss the petition for injunction but ...