Legal Opinion · Dissent

Major Manufacturing Corp. v. Department of Revenue

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 29, 1994No. 2525 C.D. 1993Published

1DissentFriedman, Judge

I vigorously dissent. I believe that Major Manufacturing Corporation’s (Major) Lucky Tab Pull Tab Dispenser Model *5901010-BV (Model 1010-BV) does not violate section 3 of the Local Option Small Games of Chance Act (Act)1 by “playing” or assisting in the “play” of the pull-tab game. Moreover, the Model 1010-BV is nothing more than a dispensing machine and, as such, is expressly exempted from the prohibition against mechanical and electrical devices in section 3. Thus, I would reverse the order of the Secretary of Revenue, who accepted the recommendation of the Small Games of Chance Board and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Two Electronic Poker Game MacHinesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Mormak v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  3. In re District Attorney of Wyoming County Seeking Forfeiture of One 1986 Oldsmobile SedanCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API