Moore v. Parker
| Decision Date | 31 December 1804 |
| Citation | 5 N.C. 37 |
| Parties | JOHN MOORE v. DANIEL PARKER. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
1. A racing contract must be in writing.
2. A deed may be shown to have been delivered in escrow without pleading it.
Action of debt on a bond. Plea, non est factum, payment, set-off and the act of Assembly directing the manner in which bets on horse races shall be recovered.
The subscribing witness proved the signing and sealing of the bond; that it was given for money won on a horse race, to wit, the best two in three heats, one mile. The defendant's counsel then asked if the bond was delivered by the defendant to the plaintiff, or to any other person, upon conditions. To this question the counsel for the plaintiff objected, on the ground that it was intended to show the bond was delivered as an escrow, without pleading that it was so delivered. The court overruled the objection, and the witness answered that the bond was delivered to one Copeland, to be the deed of the defendant if the plaintiff won the race. The plaintiff could not show articles in writing containing the terms of the race, and that he had won the race; and, therefore, thedefendant had a verdict.
It was, in the course of the trial, contended by the plaintiff's counsel that this case being within the first section of the act of Assembly, and the race a course race, within the proviso of the act, he was entitled to a verdict.
BY THE COURT. The evidence of the subscribing witness, proving the deed to be delivered to a third person, was properly received by the court; and in all racing contracts it is incumbent on the plaintiff to bring his case within both sections of the act of 1800; and, therefore, the rule for a new trial must be discharged.
To continue reading
Request your trial