Hale v. Sherwood
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Assumpsit for money received by tbo defendants to the plaintiff’s use; brought' to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County and tried to the jury on the general issue, with notice, before Brewster, J. The notice was that the defendant held the money as a stakeholder upon a bet at a race between a horse of the plaintiff and a horse of one Howe ; that a dispute having arisen as to which of them won it was submitted by the plaintiff and Howe to an arbitrator, who awarded…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for money received by tbo defendants to the plaintiff’s use; brought' to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County and tried to the jury on the general issue, with notice, before Brewster, J. The notice was that the defendant held the money as a stakeholder upon a bet at a race between a horse of the plaintiff and a horse of one Howe ; that a dispute having arisen as to which of them won it was submitted by the plaintiff and Howe to an arbitrator, who awarded in favor of Howe, and that ho had thereupon paid the money over to Howe before the plaintiff had repented or sought to…
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
The courts of this state have very seldom been called on to enforce claims of parties directly or remotely connected with wagering contracts. Such contracts are considered contrary to the principles of morality and against sound policy. Perhaps the only case to he found in our reports on this subject is that of Wheeler v. Spencer, 15 Conn., 28. There, as here, the plaintiff sought to recover from the defendant an amount of money deposited with him as a stake-holder. Judge Hinman, who gave the opinion of the court, after considering the questions involved, came to the following conclusion, (p.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wheeler v. SpencerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1842
3Cited by3 opinions
- Riddle v. PerryNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
- Maher v. Van HornColorado Court of Appeals · 1900
- Maher v. Van HornColorado Court of Appeals · 1900