Larschen v. Lantzes
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Appeal by defendant from judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, borough of Manhattan, sixth district, in favor of plaintiff.
1Opinion of the CourtGuy, J.
In this action against maker of check given to pay sixty dollars lost in playing at cards, the evidence authorized the finding that the plaintiff is a holder in due course, and the court awarded him a recovery.
The undisputed evidence of both the maker and the payee of the check is that the check was given in payment of a gambling debt.
Appellant contends that as our statute makes a check given to pay a gambling debt void, a recovery, even in a suit by a holder in due course, is not warranted.
By the provisions of the Penal Law all wagers, bets, or stakes, made to depend upon any race, or upon…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Sabine v. . PaineNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Alexander & Co. v. HazelriggCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1906
- Lipedes v. Liverpool & London & Globe InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
3Cited by5 opinions
- Farmers' State Bank of Texhoma v. Clayton Nat. BankNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1925
- McCormick v. FallierSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- Whitaker v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
- Bernstein v. FuerthNew York City Court · 1928
- Walker v. WalbridgeNew York Supreme Court · 1934