Hargreaves v. Greate Bay Hotel & Casino

• Decision Date: 13 May 1987
• Docket Number: No. 74210,74210
• Citation: Hargreaves v. Greate Bay Hotel & Casino, 357 S.E.2d 305, 182 Ga.App. 852 (Ga. App. 1987)
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
• Parties: HARGREAVES v. GREATE BAY HOTEL & CASINO.

Page 305

357 S.E.2d 305

182 Ga.App. 852

HARGREAVES v.GREATE BAY HOTEL & CASINO.

No. 74210.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

May 13, 1987.

John McGuigan, Jr., Atlanta, for appellant.

Teresa M. Wright, Atlanta, for appellee.

SOGNIER, Judge.

Greate Bay Hotel & Casino (Greate Bay) obtained a valid judgment against George Hargreaves in New Jersey in its suit to collect a gambling debt.Greate Bay then filed suit against Hargreaves in Georgia to domesticate the New Jersey judgment.The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Greate Bay, and Hargreaves appeals.

Appellant contends the trial court erred by granting judgment to Greate Bay as a matter of law because the underlying debt is a gambling debt, and it is against the public policy of the State of Georgia to enforce such a debt.OCGA § 13-8-2(a)(4).Although fully aware that gambling is against the public policy of Georgia, we note this is not a suit on the gambling debt itself, but rather a suit to domesticate a valid judgment of a sister state.It is undisputed that Hargreaves filed an answer and counterclaim in the New Jersey action, thus conferring valid jurisdiction on that court.Both the United States Supreme Court, Fauntleroy v. Lum, 210 U.S. 230, 28 S.Ct. 641, 52 L.Ed. 1039(1908), and the Georgia Supreme Court, Cannon v. Cannon, 244 Ga. 299, 260 S.E.2d 19(1979), have held that full faith and credit must be accorded the valid judgment of another state, even though such a judgment could not have been obtained in our own courts because the underlying contract is void as against the state's public policy."A cause of action on a judgment is different...