Trinkle

Trinkle v. California State Lottery

Good Law
105 Cal. App. 4th 1401·129 Cal. Rptr. 2d 904·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 159·2003 Daily Journal DAR 1397·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1118
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 4, 2003C038754California4,869 words

Opinion

Opinion

Blease, J.

Plaintiff John Trinkle appeals from the judgment entered following the granting of defendant California State Lottery’s (CSL) motion for summary judgment and denying Trinkle’s cross-motion for summary judgment.

In his complaint and cross-motion for summary adjudication, Trinkle sought declaratory relief to determine whether the CSL’s use of electronic vending machines to dispense SCRATCHERS lottery tickets is an illegal use of slot machines. The Superior Court found the SCRATCHERS vending machines (SVM) are not illegal slot machines.

On appeal, Trinkle challenges this ruling. We find no error and affirm the judgment.

Factual Background

The parties stipulated to the following description of the SVM: The vending machines used to dispense lottery tickets in CSL’s SCRATCHERS games are electromechanical devices for dispensing SCRATCHERS lottery tickets. Each vending machine consists of a stand-alone cabinet containing a number of bins into which a stock of SCRATCHERS tickets may be loaded into each bin. A minimum of 100 or 250 tickets may be loaded in each bin, depending upon the price of the SCRATCHERS ticket in the game loaded in that bin. Each bin may contain a separate…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.