Court Opinion

ID: 9481813
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 08:32:31.107494+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:48:35.471544
License: Public Domain

VELA, District Judge,
concurring:
I reluctantly concur in this panel’s opinion. I recognize that Texas case law currently supports Judge Garwood’s well reasoned opinion and in all likelihood, the Texas Supreme Court would have come to the very same decision but the unfortunate outcome seems most inequitable.
*627The change in Texas’ public policy on gambling should not be described as an evolution but rather a revolution. With talk of a possible state lottery it appears more forms of gambling are becoming acceptable in this State. The result here may be legally justified, however it sends out a poor message to would be gamblers. Go on credit and the House takes the risk. Aubin had profited from a similar exception in Aubin v. Hunsucker, 481 S.W.2d 952 (Tex.Civ.App.Austin 1972), and once again avoids an obligation which was knowingly made.
As occasionally it occurs, an outcome which is unjust is not only legally valid but mandated. I therefore feel compelled to concur, but with the above mentioned explanations and frustrations.