Wise v. Rose

Citations

• 110 Cal. 159
• 42 P. 569
• 1895 Cal. LEXIS 1033

Syllabus

<p>Wager—Repudiation before Decision—Recovery from Stakeholder. Where a wager upon, the result of a horserace is repudiated, and notice of the repudiation given to the stakeholder before the race is run and the wager decided, the stakeholder is bound to deliver the stake deposited with him by the party repudiating the wager to such party, and he may recover the same from the stakeholder, though subsequently paid over to the winning party.</p> <p>Id.—Pleading—Insufficiency of Denial,—Where the complaint avers that notice of repudiation was given before the race was run, an answer admitting that the notice was given, but stating that the defendant cannot positively say whether it was received prior to the time when the event occurred, or prior to the time when the wager was decided, does not deny the averment of the complaint that he had notice of the repudiation before the race was run, and before it was known, or could have been known, whether plaintiff had won or lost the wager.</p> <p>Id.—Conjunctive Denial.—A conjunctive denial of several distinct allega, tions of the complaint, connected by the conjunction “and,” is not a denial of any one of them.</p> <p>Id.—Evidence—Regulations of Turf.—The regulations and usages of the turf are subject to the laws of the state, and it is not admissible to prove that the words “play or pay,” in a written agreement of wager upon a horserace, mean that, after the stakes were placed, neither party could repudiate the wager without the consent of the other, even though one of the horses should die before the day set for the race.</p>