delivered the opinion of the court.
Rosetti v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co., 203 Ill. App. 200 (1917)
Jan. 8, 1917
·
Illinois Appellate Court
·
Gen. No. 22,528
203 Ill. App. 200
Tony Rosetti and Vincent Manno, copartners, trading as Tony Rosetti & Company Labor Agency, Defendants in Error, v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company et al., Plaintiffs in Error.
Gen. No. 22,528.
(Not to be reported in full.)
Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Edward T. Wade, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed January 8, 1917.
Rehearing denied January 22, 1917.
Statement of the Case.
Action by Tony Rosetti and Vincent Manno, copartners, trading as Tony Rosetti & Company Labor *201Agency, plaintiffs, against the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company, a corporation, Rock Island Lines and the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Company, a corporation, defendants, to recover for breach of a contract under which plaintiffs agreed to furnish laborers, whom the defendants agreed to employ and furnish transportation to. From a judgment for plaintiffs for eighty-six dollars, defendants bring error.
Abstract of the Decision.
1. - Contracts, § 385 * —when evidence is insufficient to show contract with employment agency for the employment of laborers and the furnishing of transportation therefor. In an action by an employment agency against a railroad company, evidence consisting of letters written by officers of the defendant to plaintiff stating that they could use a certain number of men and that transportation would be furnished, held sufficient to show a contract for the employment of laborers and for the furnishing of transportation therefor:
2. Master and servant, § 19 * —what names of employees must be placed upon register of employment agency. Under J. & A. fi 5322 et seg., relating to private employment agencies, only the names of those employees whose applications for employment have been accepted must be registered on the books of the employment-agencies.
3. Master and servant, § 19 * —when person contracting for service of laborers is estopped to claim that names of rejected laborers have not been formally registered. A railroad company, defendant in an action by an employment agency to recover for breach of a contract for the furnishing of laborers, resulting in plaintiff being compelled to return registration fees to such em*202ployees, cannot avail itself of the defense that the names of such rejected employees were not placed upon the register of the employment agency so as to entitle the agency to a registration fee, where the names of such employees were not and could not legally be placed upon the register owing to the fact that defendant failed to comply with its agreement to take such laborers.
*201Charles T. Schwarz, for plaintiffs in error.
Cyrus J. Wood, for defendants in error.