Irving v. Britton
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal from city court, general term. Action by Robert G. Irving against Joseph A. Britton on a note given for an interest in a pool, and for a bet with the bookmaker at a horse race. From a judgment of the city court affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.
1Opinion of the CourtPryor, J.
The cause of action admitted by stipulation of the parties is a transaction in pool selling and bookmaking on a horse race, and, if such pool selling and bookmaking be illegal, the plaintiff is barred of recovery by the immemorial and salutary maxim that "ex turpi causa non oritur actio.” Gray v. Hook, 4 N. Y. 449, 455; Hull v. Ruggles, 56 N. Y. 424. By sections 351 and 352 of the Penal Code, pool selling and bookmaking on a horse race are denounced as crimes, and punished by fine and. imprisonment. But plaintiff contends that the pool selling and bookmaking exhibited in the case are…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- People v. . GillsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Horner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Hull v. . RugglesNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- The Saratoga County Bank v. . KingNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- People v. Noelke & MarksNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Kentucky Jockey ClubCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1931
- Oneida County Fair Board v. SmylieIdaho Supreme Court · 1963
- People v. PostmaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- People ex rel. Lawrence v. FallonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Pando v. FernandezNew York Supreme Court · 1984
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.