Loose v. Larsen
Nevada Supreme Court
Appeal from Sixth Judicial District Court, Humboldt County; Edward A. Ducker, Judge. Action by H. Loose against Lillian Larsen. Judgment for plaintiff. From order denying motion for new trial, defendant appeals. "Whatever tends to interfere with the beneficial operation of the statute is unlawful and against the policy of the law. ” (Sheldon v. Pruessner, 35 Pac. 203.) "No court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or illegal act.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Sixth Judicial District Court, Humboldt County; Edward A. Ducker, Judge. Action by H. Loose against Lillian Larsen. Judgment for plaintiff. From order denying motion for new trial, defendant appeals. "Whatever tends to interfere with the beneficial operation of the statute is unlawful and against the policy of the law. ” (Sheldon v. Pruessner, 35 Pac. 203.) "No court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or illegal act. If from plaintiff’s own stating, or otherwise, the cause of action appears to arise ex turpi causa or the transgression of a…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Coleman, J.:
This is an appeal from an order denying á motion for a new trial.
The judgment in this case is in favor of respondent, who was the plaintiff in the trial court, and is based upon an action to recover judgment upon a certain promissory note executed by appellant. For defense to the cause of action mentioned, the answer alleged that the note described in the complaint was given to cover a balance of an indebtedness due plaintiff for liquors sold and delivered by him to defendant, who was engaged in conducting a house of ill-fame within the restricted distance from a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hanauer v. DoaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Southern Pac. Co. v. HaradaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1901
3Cited by1 opinion
- McConnon v. HoldenIdaho Supreme Court · 1922