CUDD v. Aschenbrenner
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.
This is an appeal by the plaintiffs from a decree entered ;by the circuit court in a declaratory judgment proceeding which held that a promotion scheme conducted by the plaintiffs for the purpose of attracting customers to two grocery stores was a lottery under the provisions of ORS 167.405 and Article XV, Oregon Constitution. The defendant is Mr. L. A. Aschenbrenner, district attorney for Josephine County.
The promotion scheme or program which is in essence a weeHy “lucky draw,” is known as “Strike it Rich.” Anyone desiring to do so may enter one of the stores using the plaintiffs’ scheme and…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Federal Communications Commission v. American Broadcasting Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1954
- Wisconsin & Michigan Railway Co. v. PowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Fox v. GallowayOregon Supreme Court · 1944
- McGovern v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Philpot v. GruningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- James v. Carnation Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1977
- Mobil Oil Corp. v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1972
- Mobil Oil Corporation v. DanforthSupreme Court of Missouri · 1970
- Roberts v. Communications Investment Club of WoonsocketSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1981
- Blackburn v. IppolitoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1963
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.