Grant v. Ryan

Citations

• 37 Tex. 37

Syllabus

<p>1. It is now the well-established doctrine that when a transaction is tainted by illegality, no legal or equitable rights can result from it. And it is immaterial whether the illegality be part of the cause of action, or be merely introductory to it; if the plaintiff requires any aid from the illegal transaction, in order to make out his case, he cannot maintain the suit.</p> <p>2. Plaintiff alleged the sale to the defendants of a stock of cattle, to be paid for by them in Confederate States bonds, and he alleged the illegality of the transaction and the worthlessness of the bonds, and sought judgment for the value of the cattle. Held, that the action cannot be maintained. The fact that the plaintiff himself renounces the illegal contract, cannot entitle him to recover on a transaction void for illegality, and in which he was in pwi'i delicto with the defendants.</p> <p>3. This court adheres to its decisions that executory contracts based upon Confederate money, cannot be enforced. It holds that no pretense of force or necessity can vindicate such contracts, and recognizes no analogy between the condition of the people of the so-called Confederate States and that of a people temporarily subjected to the authority of a foreign power, and compelled to submit to its exactions.</p> <p>4. If a person of unsound mind was fraudulently induced to part with property for a Confederate money consideration, relief would be afforded him by the courts; but his recovery would be measured by the value of the property, and not that of the Confederate money.</p>