# CUDD v. Aschenbrenner

> Oregon Supreme Court · December 19, 1962 · 233 Or. 272

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9545973

## Case

- **Full name:** CUDD Et Al v. ASCHENBRENNER
- **Court:** Oregon Supreme Court
- **Decided:** December 19, 1962
- **Citations:** 233 Or. 272; 377 P.2d 150; 1962 Ore. LEXIS 484
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by O'Oonnell
- **Judges:** O'Oonnell, McAllisteb, McAllister, Rossman, Perry, Sloan, O'Connell, Goodwin, Lusk
- **Cited by:** 15 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9545973

## Opinion text

O’OONNELL, J.,
specially concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority. I do not agree with that part of the opinion which purports to distinguish the present case from McFadden v. Bain, 162 Or 250 , 91 P2d 292 (1939). McFadden v. Bain was incorrectly decided and should be overruled.
I agree with the majority in holding that a lottery does not exist unless the device employed tends to produce the type of evil which the constitution was intended to obviate. Those evils are not present in the operation of the advertising scheme adopted by the plaintiff in this case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9545973. Public record. Not legal advice.