Legal Opinion

Lee on v. Long

California Supreme Court

Decided June 29, 1951No. S. F. 18026PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.

The question to be determined is whether the trial court erred in its judgment denying plaintiffs the. right to recover money seized while in use in gambling games, which games were being conducted in violation of law. Consistent with the settled principle that the courts will not lend assistance to persons whose claim for relief rests on an illegal transaction, it is our conclusion that plaintiffs cannot prevail.

*501In August, 1945, plaintiffs were arrested in a gambling raid made on certain premises in El Cerrito. Thereafter plaintiffs were charged with the violation of section 330 of the Penal…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hofferman v. SimmonsNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
  2. Fairmount Engine Co. v. Montgomery CountySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  3. Dorrell v. ClarkMontana Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Chapman v. AggelerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. State v. JohnsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1948

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. People v. CahanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. State v. CoryWashington Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Consul Limited, Kenneth B. Wilson Dba Ken Wilson Associates v. Solide Enterprises, Inc., a Corporation, and Hrh Operating Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
  4. Wong v. Tenneco, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Massoud Bassidji v. Simon Soul Sun GoeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API