State v. Schubert Theatre Players Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentLoring, Justice
Stated concisely, the majority opinion puts the test as to whether the acts charged constitute a lottery as follows: “The test is whether that group who did pay for admission were paying in part for the chance of a prize.” Commonwealth v. Wall (Mass.) 3 N. E. (2d) 28, 30. With that test I agree. But I find nothing in the information that charges that a part of the charge for admission was for a chance on the prize, nor do I find any facts alleged from Avhich it might be properly inferred that the right to participate by those outside the theater was a cloak or device to evade the law or that…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. EamesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1936
- State v. WilsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1938
- State v. EricksonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900