Case ID: sw_249/html/0889-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PLY, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

GARZA v. RICHMOND.
    (No. 6889.)
    (Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.
    March 7, 1923.
    Rehearing Denied April 11, 1923.)
    Gaming <S=»26(I) — No recovery on checks given for money lost at gambling. ^
    In an action by a payee of checks against the drawer to recover money advanced for thé checks, where defendant gave the checks to plaintiff for money which defendant afterward lost to plaintiff in gambling, judgment for defendant was proper.
    Appeal from Maverick County Court; W. A. Bonnett, Judge.
    Action by Pablo de la Garza against R. E. Richmond. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    David E. Hume, of Eagle Pass, for appellant.
    H. E. Veltmann, of Brackettville, for ap-pellee.
   PLY, C. J.

Appellant sued appellee for the sum of $300,. evidenced by four checks, two for $50 each, and two for $100 each. The defense was that the checks were' given for gambling debts in Mexico. The court rendered judgment in favor of appellee.

The evidence, while quite meager, is sufficient to show that appellee had gone across the Rio Grande to Piedras Negras, and while there became intoxicated and began playing at roulette, with $75 he had gone over with, and, after losing that sum, obtained the $300 from appellant on his checks, and soon lost that on the roulette table. The evidence indicates that appellant kept a saloon and a gambling house, and that the $75 and the amounts advanced on the checks were lost on the gaming device of appellant, and all went into his coffers. Appellant not only got the $75, but also got back the money for which the checks were given.

The checks were given for gambling purposes at a gaming table being run in the interest of appellant. He lost nothing, and the court very properly refused to lend itself .to the collection of a debt founded' on a gambling consideration. This is well settled by Texas decisions. •

The judgment is affirmed.