First National Bank v. Carroll
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Union District Court. — Hon. R. C. Henry, Judge. Action on a promissory note for one hundred and fifty dollars.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Union District Court. — Hon. R. C. Henry, Judge. Action on a promissory note for one hundred and fifty dollars. The execution of the note is admitted, but it is alleged to be void because given in fulfillment of a gambling contract, of which the following is a copy: “Crestón, Iowa, December 5, 1888. “In consideration of thirty dollars paid me this day by L. J. Cusick, I hereby guaranty to him that the five cars of cattle shipped by Cusick Bros., on December 8, to Chicago, shall sell in Chicago for four (4) cents per pound, and, he having a one-half interest in said cattle, I agree…
1Opinion of the CourtGranger, J.
— Counsel in argument agree that the question for determination is whether or not the contract set out in the answer is a wagering contract. If so, the note in suit, given as it was in pursuance of the contract, is void under our holdings,- even in the hands of the plaintiffs. Traders' Bank v. Alsop, 64 Iowa, 97. Appellant likens this contract, in its purpose and effect, to “option deals,” which are held to be gambling contracts, and void. Appellee, however, urges as a distinctive feature that in option deals there is no actual property as a basis for the transaction, and no property is…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Traders Bank v. AlsopSupreme Court of Iowa · 1884
- Tomblin v. CallenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
- Waugh v. BeckSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
3Cited by11 opinions
- Young v. StephensonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- Burney v. BlanksCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
- Plank v. SwiftSupreme Court of Iowa · 1919
- Fisher v. BrehmSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1924
- Furrh v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1925
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.