Clark v. Gibson
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Foreign Attachment. The following facts appeared from the disclosure of the trustee. On the 13th day of July, 1840, the defendant and Benjamin Kendrick deposited in the hands of the trustee the sum of fifty dollars each, which he was to hold until the fourth day of March, 1841. On that day both sums were to be paid to the defendant, if before that time Martin Van Burén should be reelected to the presidency of the United States ■ but if William Henry Harrison should be…
Read the full summary
Foreign Attachment. The following facts appeared from the disclosure of the trustee. On the 13th day of July, 1840, the defendant and Benjamin Kendrick deposited in the hands of the trustee the sum of fifty dollars each, which he was to hold until the fourth day of March, 1841. On that day both sums were to be paid to the defendant, if before that time Martin Van Burén should be reelected to the presidency of the United States ■ but if William Henry Harrison should be elected, the money was to be paid to Kendrick. The agreement remained un-rescinded until the fourth day of March, when,…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, J.
It has been settled in this state, in the cases of Perkins vs. Eaton, 3 N. H. Rep. 152, and Hoit vs. Hodge, 6 N. H. Rep. 104, that a wager on a subject in which the parties have no interest, is not a valid contract; and the former case also settles, that while the money is in the hands of the stake-holder, and before it is paid over to the winner, it may he recovered by an action. The interest referred to by the court is undoubtedly of a pecuniary character. The class of illegal wagers would be very small, if they might be laid upon matters of public concern, affecting the legal, or…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pekkins v. EatonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1825
- Hoit v. HodgeSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1833
3Cited by1 opinion
- Smith v. BeanSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1844