Stevens v. Sharp
Illinois Supreme Court
The following are admitted and agreed to bo the facts in the case: In August, A. D. 1860, plaintiff and one Braden, both then and now citizens, residents and voters of the State of Illinois, made a wager of $1,000 each on the result of the then approaching presidential election. Plaintiff betting $1,000 that S. A. Douglas would be elected the next president of the United States, and Braden betting $1,000 that he (Douglas) would not.
Read the full summary
The following are admitted and agreed to bo the facts in the case: In August, A. D. 1860, plaintiff and one Braden, both then and now citizens, residents and voters of the State of Illinois, made a wager of $1,000 each on the result of the then approaching presidential election. Plaintiff betting $1,000 that S. A. Douglas would be elected the next president of the United States, and Braden betting $1,000 that he (Douglas) would not. Said plaintiff and Braden placed $1,000 each in the hands of defendant, as stake-holder for the parties aforesaid. That some days before suit brought, and long…
1Opinion of the CourtCaton, C. J.
This judgment was correct upon the agreed state of facts, and should undoubtedly be affirmed. The bet was clearly against the statute as well as the common law, and the plaintiff was entiled to recover the money back from the stake-holder. Indeed, we can hardly be persuaded that the case is not brought here solely to gain time.
The judgment is affirmed. Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Kearney v. WebbIllinois Supreme Court · 1917