Mytinger v. Springer
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Huntingdon county. Ellis Springer and Nathan Wright against Lewis Mytinger. This was an action of assumpsit, in which the plaintiffs counted for money had and received to the amount of $1000. The proof was, that the plaintiffs united in depositing the sum of $1000 in the hands of the defendant, which was wagered upon the result of an election, and which he received notice from the plaintiffs not to pay over.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Huntingdon county. Ellis Springer and Nathan Wright against Lewis Mytinger. This was an action of assumpsit, in which the plaintiffs counted for money had and received to the amount of $1000. The proof was, that the plaintiffs united in depositing the sum of $1000 in the hands of the defendant, which was wagered upon the result of an election, and which he received notice from the plaintiffs not to pay over. The question was argued in this court and decided upon the point, whether a joint action would lie. Other questions were presented to the court below, upon…
1Opinion of the Court
The'opinion of the Court was delivered by
Rogers, J.
The only point on which any serious difficulty arises, is in the instruction that the plaintiffs can sustain a joint suit to recover the money from the stake-holder. Taking it for granted that plaintiffs owned the money in unequal, or equal proportions, (and this is the fair import of the evidence), and that the defendant paid the money to the winner in defiance of notice, the question remains, can a joint suit be sustained to recover an illegal wager. The very point has not yet been decided; but in one case, which will be noticed, an opinion…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Reichly v. MaclaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
3Cited by2 opinions
- Humbird v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Larzelere v. JonesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913