Bunn v. Riker
New York Supreme Court
THIS cause came before the court, on a writ of error, from the coipmon pleas of the city of New-Tork. Riker, the defendant in error, brought an action of assumpsit, against Bunn, the plaintiff in error, in the court below. The declaration contained three counts. The first count was on the following receipt, or memorandum, in writing.
Read the full summary
THIS cause came before the court, on a writ of error, from the coipmon pleas of the city of New-Tork. Riker, the defendant in error, brought an action of assumpsit, against Bunn, the plaintiff in error, in the court below. The declaration contained three counts. The first count was on the following receipt, or memorandum, in writing. “ New-York, 30th April, 1807. “ Received of Joseph Graham, and Samuel Riker, jun. 100 dollars each ; which sums I promise to pay to Mr. Graham, in case Morgan Lewis, shall be re-elected governor of this state, or to Mr. Riker, in case Daniel D. Tompkins shall be…
1Opinion of the CourtVan Ness, J.
The counsel for the plaintiff in error, denies, that, at common law, any wager is recoverable, wherein the parties have no other interest than that which they create by the wager itself. It is now too late to draw this point into discussion. The law appears to be settled, that some wagers form the proper ground of an action. It is worthy of remark, however, that as often as this question has been raised, there is scarcely a judge in England, from the time of the case of Da Costa v. Jones, down to the present day, who has not expressed his regret that such was the law.
But that there is a class…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Jackson v. LodgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Gibbons v. GouverneurCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
- Johnston v. RussellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Morgan v. GroffNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Hickerson v. BensonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1834
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.