Tarver v. Keach, 82 U.S. 67 (1872)

U.S. Supreme Court

Tarver v. Keach, 82 U.S. 15 Wall. 67 67 (1872)

Tarver v. Keach

82 U.S. (15 Wall.) 67

Syllabus

When a decision holding a contract void is made by the highest court of a state upon the general principles by which courts determine that a transaction is good or bad on principles of public policy, the decision is one which this Court is not authorized to review.

The suit below was upon a note payable in common currency circulating in the State of Texas at its maturity -- that is, on the 27th day of November, 1863. This common currency was Confederate notes, and the note in question was given for the purchase of land.

The supreme court of the state held that the transaction was a gambling one and dismissed the suit on that ground. The case being then brought here under an assumption that it came within the 25th section of the Judiciary Act, quoted supra, p. 82 U. S. 3, the present motion was made.

Page 82 U. S. 68

U.S. Supreme Court

Tarver v. Keach, 82 U.S. 15 Wall. 67 67 (1872)

Tarver v. Keach

82 U.S. (15 Wall.) 67

ON MOTION TO DISMISS WRIT OF ERROR TO

THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF TEXAS

Syllabus

When a decision holding a contract void is made by the highest court of a state upon the general principles by which courts determine that a transaction is good or bad on principles of public policy, the decision is one which this Court is not authorized to review.

The suit below was upon a note payable in common currency circulating in the State of Texas at its maturity -- that is, on the 27th day of November, 1863. This common currency was Confederate notes, and the note in question was given for the purchase of land.

The supreme court of the state held that the transaction was a gambling one and dismissed the suit on that ground. The case being then brought here under an assumption that it came within the 25th section of the Judiciary Act, quoted supra, p. 82 U. S. 3, the present motion was made.

Page 82 U. S. 68

THE CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the opinion of the Court.

In Delmas v. Insurance Company, * decided at last term, we held that when

"a decision holding a contract void is made by the highest court of a state upon the general principles by which courts determine that a transaction is good or bad on principles of public policy, the decision is one we are not authorized to review."

We are entirely satisfied with that judgment and with the grounds assigned for it, and do not think it necessary to restate them. It follows that the writ of error to the Supreme Court of Texas must be

Dismissed.

* 14 Wall. 661.