Blair v. Lowham
| Decision Date | 26 March 1929 |
| Docket Number | 4693 |
| Citation | 276 P. 292,73 Utah 599 |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
| Parties | BLAIR v. LOWHAM |
Rehearing Denied April 13, 1929.
Appeal from District Court, Second District, Weber County; J. N Kimball, Judge.
Action by H. S. Blair against James Lowham. Judgment for plaintiff and defendant appeals.
REVERSED.
Frank Reeder and A. G. Horn, both of Ogden, for respondent.
John C. Davis and Stuart P. Dobbs, both of Ogden, for appellant.
The plaintiff recovered a judgment against defendant for $ 950, the value of an undivided one-half interest in an automobile, which the court found was the property of the plaintiff, and which had been converted by the defendant. The defendant appeals. The relevant facts as found by the court are in substance that the plaintiff and defendant with their families resided at Ogden. On September 5, 1927, the two families together attended a Labor Day celebration at Lagoon, a pleasure resort in Davis county. A feature of the celebration was the giving away, by the operator of the resort, of an automobile, to one of the persons attending the celebration. To obtain admission to the resort, it was required that each person present a ticket of admission to an adjoining race track, a railroad ticket issued by an electric railway company serving such resort, or to pay an admission fee. The fee charged was 10 cents for each person coming on foot, or 50 cents per load for those in automobiles. The scheme was to give to every person, upon being admitted to the resort, a numbered ticket entitling him to one chance for the prize. By lot or chance the winning ticket was determined, and the holder awarded the automobile. The defendant and his family were transported from their home in Ogden to the celebration in the plaintiff's automobile. On their way thither the plaintiff and defendant agreed that, if any ticket issued to any member of their party should win the automobile, the plaintiff and defendant should share the same equally. Upon arrival at the resort, the defendant paid 50 cents, the sum required for the admission of the party to the resort, and received six tickets (there being six members of the party) for the automobile drawing. The defendant retained all of the tickets in his possession, and one of them was later determined, by chance, to entitle the holder to the automobile. The defendant accordingly presented the winning ticket and the automobile was transferred and delivered to him. He thereafter denied the plaintiff's ownership of any interest in the automobile and appropriated the same to his own exclusive use. The plaintiff thereupon brought this action, which resulted in a judgment in his favor as above stated.
The judgment is assailed upon the grounds that the transaction by which the automobile was disposed of was a lottery, in violation of law, and that the agreement relied upon was unlawful, and contrary to public policy, and for such reasons unenforceable.
Lotteries are defined and prohibited by Comp. Laws Utah 1917, § 8153 et seq., as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Albert Lea Amusement Corp. v. Hanson
...though the plan provided for participation without charge, the latter fact being more or less concealed from the public. Blair v. Lowham, 73 Utah 599, 276 P. 292; State v. Danz, 140 Wash. 546, 250 P. 37, 48 A.L.R. 1109; State v. Schubert Theatre Players Co., 203 Minn. 366, 281 N.W. 5. State......
-
Commonwealth v. Lund
...v. State, 5 Sneed, Tenn., 507; Featherstone v. Association, Tex.Civ.App., 10 S.W.2d 124; Randle v. State, 42 Tex. 580; Blair v. Lowham, 73 Utah 599, 276 P. 292; Society et al. v. Seattle, 118 Wash. 258, 203 P. 21; United States v. Wallis, D.C., 58 F. 942; Horner v. United States, 147 U.S. 4......
-
Commonwealth v. Lund
...931; Bell v. State (Tenn.), 5 Sneed 507; Featherstone v. Association (Tex.), 10 S.W. (2) 124; Randle v. State, 42 Tex. 580; Blair v. Lowham, 73 Utah 599, 276 P. 292; Society et al. v. Seattle, 118 Wash. 258; 203 P. U.S. v. Wallis, 58 Fed. (D. C.) 942; Horner v. U.S. 147 U.S. 449, 13 Sup. 40......
-
Albertson's, Inc. v. Hansen
...29 Utah 2d 452, 511 P.2d 725 (1973).2 This section was previously designated section 28.3 75 Wash.2d 339, 450 P.2d 949 (1969).4 73 Utah 599, 276 P. 292 (1929).5 140 Wash. 546, 250 P. 37, 48 A.L.R. 1109 (1926).6 Art. 2, § 24: "The legislature shall never authorize any lottery . . ."7 Pp. 955......