Earl v. Howell
City of New York Municipal Court
Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. William M. Earl and another, who were stockbrokers in business under the firm name of Earl & Dayton, sued William H. Howell, upon a promissory note given by him to settle a balance due on account of operations in the purchase and sale of stocks, under an agreement, the substance of which appears in the opinion. The defendant claimed that the note was invalid because given in settlement of a wagering contract.
1Opinion of the CourtHawes, J.
The facts in this case, as narrated by the defendant, are conceded by the plaintiffs, and we are called upon to determine whether they establish a defense in law.
The plaintiffs are stockbrokers in this city, and in the course of their business they solicited defendant “ to carry on operations through their house,” and offered him strong inducements to do so, by relieving him from advancing money for margin, and by promising not to “press” him if he should be a loser, and by allowing him to take time to pay such losses, and further stipulating, in view of defendant’s pecuniary condition, that…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Harris v. . WhiteNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Jeter v. Ellenville Central School DistrictNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Bigelow v. . BenedictNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- J. B. Lyon & Co. v. Culbertson, Blair & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1876
- Hawley v. BibbSupreme Court of Alabama · 1881
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.