Abstract
Abstract This section records the history of one of my earliest adventures as an expert witness. Pennsylvania has made it illegal to possess a “gambling device,” de;ned as a machine you have to pay to play, that gives you a reward for winning, and in which chance, not skill, drives the outcome. Thus a slot machine, into which you put money to play, gives you money if you win, and whose outcome is determined solely by chance, is a gambling device per se (i.e., in and of itself). By contrast, a deck of cards could be used for gambling, but could be used solely for amusement, and hence is not a gambling device per se. The issue in this case was whether a certain kind of draw poker machine was a gambling device per se (and hence could be seized by the State Police on sight), or was a gambling device only if it was used for gambling (which would require further evidence). This question boiled down to a discussion of skill versus chance.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
