Francis v. Mauldin

After careful consideration I am constrained to dissent from that portion of the opinion of Mr. Justice Fishburne which sustains against demurrer respondent’s counterclaim for payments made by him upon the gambling obligations. (With the other conclusions I agree.)

I disagree because I think that respondent’s payments which go to make up the counterclaim were voluntary and made with full knowledge of all relevant facts which precludes recovery, S. C. cases in 26 Southeastern Digest, Payment, Key 82, page 906, and the case does not come within the exception created by the statute Code sec.…