From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Watts v. Malatesta
Court of Appeals of New York
262 N.Y. 80, 186 N.E. 210 (1933)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Watts (plaintiff), a casual gambler, placed a number of bets on horseracing with Malatesta (defendant), a professional bookmaker. Watts won approximately $250,000 and lost approximately $150,000 on these bets. However, a New York statute had banned organized betting and gambling. Watts brought suit against Malatesta to recover his losses. Malatesta counterclaimed to recover the difference between the winnings that he had paid Watts and the amount that Watts had lost. The trial court found in favor of Malatesta. The appellate court reversed, awarding Watts the amount he lost and paid to Malatesta. Malatesta appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Crouch, J.)
Dissent (Crane, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
