(a) All wagers, bets or stakes made to depend upon any race, or upon any gaming by lot or chance, or upon any lot, chance, casualty or unknown or contingent event whatever, shall be unlawful; and all contracts, judgments, conveyances and assurances for and on account of any money or property, or thing in action, so wagered, bet or staked, or to repay, or to secure any money, or property, or thing in action, lent or advanced for the purpose of such wagering, betting, or staking as aforesaid, shall be void.
(b) This section shall not apply to:
(1) Any sports wager, as defined in G.S. 18C-901, placed in accordance with Article 9 of Chapter 18C of the General Statutes.
(2) Any pari-mutuel wager, as defined in G.S. 18C-1001, placed in accordance with Article 10 of Chapter 18C of the General Statutes. (1810, c. 796, P.R; R.C., c. 51, ss. 1, 2; Code, ss. 2841, 2842; Rev., s. 1687; C.S., s. 2142; 2023-42, s. 4(f).)
§ 16-2. Players and betters competent witnesses.
No person shall be excused or incapacitated from confessing or testifying touching any money or property, or thing in action, so wagered, bet or staked, or lent for such purpose, by reason of his having won, played, bet or staked upon any game, lot or chance, casualty, or unknown or contingent event aforesaid; but the confession or testimony of such person shall not be used against him, in any criminal prosecution, on account of such betting, wagering or staking. (R.C., c. 51, s. 3; Code, s. 2843; Rev., s. 1688; C.S., s. 2143.)
Article 2.
Contracts for "Futures."
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
13
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1954–2022 · leading case:
Odell v. Legal Bucks, LLC, 665 S.E.2d 767 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008).
Odell v. Legal Bucks, LLC, 665 S.E.2d 767 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 22× “§ 16-1 , in defining illegal gaming contracts, provides: All wagers, bets or stakes made to depend upon any race, or upon any gaming by lot or chance, or upon any lot, chance, casualty or unknown or contingent event whatever, shall be unlawful; and all contracts, judgments,…”
Kerik v. Davidson Cnty., 551 S.E.2d 186 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 4× “Nevertheless, this holding does not affect the validity of the remaining Zoning Ordinance amendment, as the Board of Commissioners has expressly declared in Section 16-1 of its Zoning Ordinance that "should any provision, portion, section, or subsection of this ordinance be held…”
Cole v. Hughes, 442 S.E.2d 86 (N.C. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 9× “1 (selling or bartering lottery tickets “to be drawn or paid within or without the State” a misdemeanor, and possession of lottery ticket prima facie evidence of a violation of this section), -292 (operating or playing a game of chance a misdemeanor), -299 (money or property…”
Hatcher v. Harrah's NC Casino Co., 565 S.E.2d 241 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 5× “§ 14-292 (2001) (making gambling a Class 2 misdemeanor); N.C. Gen. Stat. § 16-1 (2001) (“Gaming and betting contracts void.”
Meyer v. Hawkinson, 2001 ND 78 (N.D. 2001).
· cites it 2× “2d 86, 89 (1994) (N.C.G.S. § 16-1 renders gambling contracts void).”
MGM Desert Inn, Inc. v. Holz, 411 S.E.2d 399 (N.C. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 3× “N.C.G.S. § 16-1 (1983). Similarly, futures contracts shall be utterly null and void; and no action shall be maintained .”
North Carolina Ex Rel. Taylor v. Carolina Racing Ass'n, 84 S.E.2d 390 (N.C. 1954).
“, for placing bets, calculating odds, determining winnings, if any, constitutes gambling within the meaning of the statutes presently codified G.S. 16-1, G.S. 16-2, and G.S. 14-292. We refer to the Felton case for a full discussion with citations of authority on this point.”
State v. Felton, 80 S.E.2d 625 (N.C. 1954).
“, lotteries, punch boards, slot machines, betting- on games of chance; and the violation of such a statute is a misdemeanor.”
Carlyle v. Sitterson, 438 F. Supp. 956 (E.D.N.C. 1975).
· cites it 2× “Section 16-1 of the Code provides that each person employed to work in any capacity in any department of the city shall be employed at the pleasure of the city and may be dismissed with or without cause by city authorities at any time.”
Rink v. VICOF II Trust (W.D.N.C. 2022).
· cites it 7× “13 For example, Plaintiff’s proposed third cause of action for negligence per se because of Defendant’s alleged violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. §16-1 (making gambling contracts unlawful) does not appear to state a valid claim under North Carolina law.”
Hanton v. United States (W.D.N.C. 2021).
“00; and South Carolina Code of Laws §§ 16-3-10, 16-3-29, § 16-1- 40; and robbery, in violation of North Carolina Gen.”
State v. McHugh, 2001 ND 76 (N.D. 2001).
“1994) (N.C.G.S. § 16-1 renders gambling contracts void).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.