Vandolah v. McKee

• Decision Date: 03 March 1903
• Citation: Vandolah v. McKee, 73 S.W. 233, 99 Mo. App. 342 (Mo. App. 1903)
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
• Parties: VANDOLAH v. McKEE.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>

73 S.W. 233

99 Mo. App. 342

VANDOLAH v. McKEE.^*

Court of Appeals at St. Louis, Missouri.

March 3, 1903.

GAMING — WAGER — LIABILITY OF STAKEHOLDER — DEMAND — SUFFICIENCY.

1. Rev. St. 1899, § 3431, provides that a stakeholder shall be liable to the party placing a bet in his hands, both before and after the determination thereof, and delivery to the winner shall be no defense; provided that no stakeholder shall be liable afterward unless a demand has been made of him previous to the time agreed on for the determination of the bet. Held, that a written notice served on a stakeholder reciting, "I hereby notify you not to pay my part of the bet made on the election of the governor * * *, held by you as stakeholder, made on October 19, 1900, with one R.," dated, and signed by the other party to the wager, was a sufficient demand within the statute to charge the stakeholder.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Clark County; Edwin R. McKee, Judge.

Action by James Vandolah against Albert McKee. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Davis & Whiteside, for appellant. W. T. Rutherford, for respondent.

Statement of Facts and Opinion.

GOODE, J.

Plaintiff and one Ragsdale laid a wager on the result of the election pending in the autumn of 1900 for governor of Missouri — plaintiff betting, it is alleged in the statement, $50 that Alexander M. Dockery would not receive 30,000 majority over Joseph Flory for governor; Ragsdale betting the same amount that said Dockery would receive that majority. McKee was the stakeholder in whose hands the respective parties put the money waged. After the election, Vandolah first claimed all the money, as he admitted, but swore that afterwards, when a dispute arose between him and Ragsdale as to the exact terms of the wager, he demanded back the part he had put up, which McKee denied, and testified that no demand whatever was made on him by Vandolah for the return of the latter's part of the money until he (McKee) had paid the entire sum in his hands to Ragsdale. On the 27th day of November the following notice, claimed to be a demand within the meaning of section 3431, Rev. St. 1899, was served on McKee:

"To Albert McKee, Notice: I hereby notify you not to pay my part of the bet made on the election of the governor of the state of Missouri, held by you as stakeholder, made on the nineteenth day of October, 1900, with one Ragsdale.

"Dated this twenty-seventh day of November, 1900.

  "[Signed]           James Vandolah."
                

McKee paid all the money to Ragsdale the next day after the service of said notice. Later, Charles Hiller, as attorney for Vandolah, demanded the return of the latter's $50, but McKee swore that said demand, which is the only one he admits was made for Vandolah's stake, came after he had turned over the money to Ragsdale. He said, however, that he intentionally gave Hiller the...