Sproat-Temple Theatre Corp. v. Colonial Theatrical Enter., Inc.

• Decision Date: 11 June 1936
• Docket Number: No. 65.,65.
• Parties: SPROAT-TEMPLE THEATRE CORPORATION et al. v. COLONIAL THEATRICAL ENTERPRISE, Inc., et al.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

276 Mich. 127

267 N.W. 602

SPROAT-TEMPLE THEATRE CORPORATION et al.

v.COLONIAL THEATRICAL ENTERPRISE, Inc., et al.

No. 65.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

June 11, 1936.

Bill by the Sproat-Temple Theatre Corporation and another against the Colonial Theatrical Enterprise, Incorporated and another. Decree for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal.

Affirmed.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Wayne County, in Chancery; De Witt H. Merriam, Judge.

Argued before the Entire Bench.

Shapero & Shapero, of Detroit, for appellants.

Morris Garvett, of Detroit, for appellees.

SHARPE, Justice.

In this cause the facts have been stipulated. Both parties operate theaters on Woodward avenue in the city of Detroit. The defendants evolved a scheme for the giving away of cash prizes to their patrons without extra cost to them and limited to those attending the theater. Each purchaser of an admission ticket to the Colonial or Majestic theaters was given a coupon ticket bearing duplicate numbers, one half of each coupon ticket being dropped in a barrel by the purchaser and the other half retained by him; and at an advertised time the barrel containing the coupon tickets was taken upon the stage of the theater and several tickets were withdrawn therefrom. The person holding the coupon or stub with the number corresponding to the number on the ticket drawn from the barrel was given a valuable money prize. The result of these drawings and giving away of money prizes diminished the business of plaintiffs' theaters and has increased the business of defendants' theaters.

Plaintiffs filed a bill of complaint against defendant companies praying for an injunction to restrain the operation of this scheme on the ground that it is in violation of Act No. 328, Pub.Acts 1931, § 372, known as the lottery law.

The trial court granted a permanent injunction and enjoined the defendants from operating a lottery in their above-named theaters and restrained them: ‘from distributing, selling or giving away tickets, slips, coupons or tokens of any character evidencing the right of the holder to participate in drawing any prizes of cash or other things of value in said theatres, and from holding any drawings and from determining by lot the winning ticket, shp, coupon or token holders in or about the said theatres.’

Defendants appeal and contend that in view of the fact that the parton pays nothing for a chance to receive the prize, no consideration runs from the public, and therefore the statute is not violated.

Act No. 328, Pub.Acts 1931, § 372, definitely prohibits any lottery or gift enterprise within the state; and prohibits the disposition of any property, real or personal, goods, chattels, or merchandise, or valuable thing by way of lottery or gift enterprise; and provides punishment for a violation thereof. Our statutes do not attempt to define what a ‘lottery’ is, but our court has said that the essentials of a lottery are consideration, prize, and chance.

See People v. Wassmus, 214 Mich. 42, 182 N.W. 66;Glover v....