Hoomes v. Smock
Court of Appeals of Virginia
Elliott having brought a suit at law against Stanard upon a bond, Smock, the appellee, became Stanard’s appear-'anee *bail. Stanard having failed to give special bail, judgment was rendered against Smock in the County Court.
Read the full summary
Elliott having brought a suit at law against Stanard upon a bond, Smock, the appellee, became Stanard’s appear-'anee *bail. Stanard having failed to give special bail, judgment was rendered against Smock in the County Court. On the chancery side of that court, Smock filed a bill, stating, that Beverley being possessed of Stanard’s bond, given for a sum of money lost at unlawful gaming, assigned it to Elliott, who after-wards understanding the nature of the consideration for which it had been given, delivered up that bond to Stanard and obtained from him another in lieu thereof, upon which the…
1Opinion of the Court
EYONS J.
delivered the opinion of the court. It has been rightly contended by the counsel for the appellee, that all bonds given for a gaming consideration are void as between the parties; and it is equally true that the assignee cannot stand in a better situation than the obligee, unless there be some particular circumstances in his favor independent of the mere assignment. But if an innocent man shall be induced by the obligor to become a purchaser of such a bond, it is a deceit upon him, and he ought not to be subject to the same equity to which the obligor was entitled against the obligee.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Shurtz v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1877
- Maupin v. WhitingCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1798