Kirkland v. Randon
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Fort Bond. Tiie appellant sued as the bearer of a negotiable promissory note. The defendants demurred, and further pleaded that the consideration for which tiie note was given was void, tiie same being for tho amount of a forfeit on failure to run a horse-race. The plaintiff excepted to all tiie matters of defense set up in tiie answer.
Read the full summary
Error from Fort Bond. Tiie appellant sued as the bearer of a negotiable promissory note. The defendants demurred, and further pleaded that the consideration for which tiie note was given was void, tiie same being for tho amount of a forfeit on failure to run a horse-race. The plaintiff excepted to all tiie matters of defense set up in tiie answer. At tiie trial the demurrer to the petition aiid the exceptions to the answer were overruled; and the canse being submitted to the court, judgment was entered for defendants. There was but one witness introduced, wlio testified, in effect, that tiie…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
Prom the testimony it appears there was no trick, unfairness, or fraud on the part of the plaintiff or the payee in the inception of this contract, or in any of the acts upon which by its terms the liability of the defendants on the note was to arise. The proceedings on the race track and the delivery of the note were all done in conformity'with the customary rules and regulations on the subject of racing-.
Unless the consideration of the note was illegal and void, the defendants were clearly' liable on their undertaking. We have decided in several cases that wagers on…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Eakin v. ScottTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Pierce v. RandolphTexas Supreme Court · 1854
- Wheeler v. FriendTexas Supreme Court · 1859
- Armstrong v. ParchmanTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- Donnelly v. Citizens' BankCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1886