{
  "id": 8630687,
  "name": "JOHN W. MOORE v. ISRAEL SCHWARTZ",
  "name_abbreviation": "Moore v. Schwartz",
  "decision_date": "1928-05-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "549",
  "last_page": "550",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "195 N.C. 549"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "181 N. C., 404",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8656182
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/181/0404-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "173 N. C., 231",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11269645
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/173/0231-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 148,
    "char_count": 1744,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.467,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20733660533876686
    },
    "sha256": "4138170c3723b74ce78bdda7078bc1811fd6f2d5b056a490b4505b90ca68f2a5",
    "simhash": "1:7a249759f69e07c2",
    "word_count": 305
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:22:12.241767+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "JOHN W. MOORE v. ISRAEL SCHWARTZ."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee Cubiam.\nGaming contracts are covered by C. S., 2142. Such contracts are void and cannot be enforced in a court of justice. Orvis v. Holt, 173 N. C., 231; Bank v. Crafton, 181 N. C., 404.\nUnder certain circumstances the holder of a check or a note given to pay a gambling debt may recover against the endorser. Bank v. Crafton, supra. This is not such a ease as the endorser is not sued.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee Cubiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Thomas W. Alexander for plaintiff.",
      "J. D. McCall for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "JOHN W. MOORE v. ISRAEL SCHWARTZ.\n(Filed 2 May, 1928.)\nGambling \u2014 Action Will Not Lie Against Maker of Check Given for Gambling Debt.\nAn action will not lie to recover against the maker upon a note given for a gambling debt.\nCivil actioN before Harding, J., at December Term, 1927, of Meck-LENBURG.\nThe defendant was indebted to the plaintiff for $183.00 and plaintiff brought suit in a magistrate\u2019s court against the defendant to recover that sum. At the trial the defendant admitted the indebtedness to the plaintiff but set up as a counterclaim a check for $170.00, payable to \u201ccash.\u201d The plaintiff denied the legality of the counterclaim and offered evidence tending to show that the check for $170.00 was given by him to one Familant to pay losses incurred in a poker game. Eamilant had endorsed the check to the defendant. There was no evidence contradicting the evidence of the plaintiff that the check sought to be used as a counterclaim by the defendant was given for the purpose of paying a gambling loss. Whereupon the judge instructed the jury to answer in the affirmative the issue relating to whether or not the check was a wagering contract. From judgment for plaintiff for the amount of his account and denying recovery on the counterclaim the defendant appealed.\nThomas W. Alexander for plaintiff.\nJ. D. McCall for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0549-01",
  "first_page_order": 621,
  "last_page_order": 622
}