Lang v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Lang v. State

50 So. 353, 162 Ala. 85, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 408

DecidedJune 30, 1909

StatusPublished

This text of 50 So. 353 (Lang v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lang v. State, 50 So. 353, 162 Ala. 85, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 408 (Ala. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

ANDERSON, J.

Section 6989 of the Code of 1907 is intended to prevent adults from betting with minors under any circumstances, and also to prohibit any one from permitting them to bet on any gaming table kept or exhibited by them, or in which they may be interested. If an adult bets money, etc., with a minor under any conditions, he violates the law; and if he permits him to bet on a table kept by him, or in which he is interested, whether with him or not, he violates the law. It matters not whether the minor is his partner or adversary in the betting. If as partners they jointly bet with others, the defendant would be betting with the minor. The statute is intended to prevent bets with or against a minor; that is, betting with the minor as an adversary, or betting jointly with the minor against others. The undisputed evidence shows' that the defendant played with John Boyce, as his partner, against two others, and as such they jointly bet upon the result, and won money from their opponents; and the trial court did not err in giving the general charge requested by the state. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ANDERSON, J.

Section 6989 of the Code of 1907 is intended to prevent adults from betting with minors under any circumstances, and also to prohibit any one from permitting them to bet on any gaming table kept or exhibited by them, or in which they may be interested. If an adult bets money, etc., with a minor under any conditions, he violates the law; and if he permits him to bet on a table kept by him, or in which he is interested, whether with him or not, he violates the law. It matters not whether the minor is his partner or adversary in the betting. If as partners they jointly bet with others, the defendant would be betting with the minor. The statute is intended to prevent bets with or against a minor; that is, betting with the minor as an adversary, or betting jointly with the minor against others. The undisputed evidence shows' that the defendant played with John Boyce, as his partner, against two others, and as such they jointly bet upon the result, and won money from their opponents; and the trial court did not err in giving the general charge requested by the state. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 So. 353, 162 Ala. 85, 1909 Ala. LEXIS 408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lang-v-state-ala-1909.