Spurgeon v. McElwain
Ohio Supreme Court
This case was tried in Franklin county, and reserved on a motion for new trial. It was a suit in assumpsit on the general counts, and tried on the general issue. It was proved at the trial, that the plaintiff performed work as a carpenter in building a nine-pin alley for the defendant, the keeper of a coffee-house.
Read the full summary
This case was tried in Franklin county, and reserved on a motion for new trial. It was a suit in assumpsit on the general counts, and tried on the general issue. It was proved at the trial, that the plaintiff performed work as a carpenter in building a nine-pin alley for the defendant, the keeper of a coffee-house. In defense, it was insisted that as the promise was laid to pay for the work done, to aid in playing a game at a place forbidden by law, the consideration was illegal, and no suit could be sustained to enforce it. The court "thus instructed the jury to correct the alleged error in…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Lane
delivered the opinion of the court:
29 Ohio Stat. 162, forbids, under a penalty, any tavern-keeper or retailer from keeping, or permitting to be kept, a nine-pin alley in the building occupied for that purpose; can a carpenter, knowing the object, recover the price of erecting it?
The principle is of general application that contracts contrary to sound morals, public policy, or forbidden by law, will not be *451executed by courts of justice. Although the rule is plain and definite, difficulties sometimes arise in its practical application. If an improper use be made of goods innocently…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Denver Park & Amusement Co. v. KirchhofSupreme Court of Colorado · 1931
- McKeown Bros. v. Ogden Kennel ClubAppellate Court of Illinois · 1933
- Board of Education v. ThompsonOhio Supreme Court · 1877
- Kinnison v. KinnisonWyoming Supreme Court · 1981
- Kinnison v. KinnisonWyoming Supreme Court · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.