BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
623.
062-155-November 16, 1962
CRIMES
LOTTERY-ELEMENTS; MERCHANT'S WORD CONTEST-'
§23, ART. III, STATE CONST.; §849.09, F. S.
To: Arthur L.. Steed, State Attorney, Orlando
QUESTION:
Does a plan whereby merchants place a word puzzle
contest in a newspaper alongside the advertisement oJ
such merchants' products, violate the lottery laws of th~~
state when such puzzle contest provides for the awarding of a prize to those who furnish a correct solution to
the puzzle?
From the sample word puzzle which you have submitted
with your letter, the following has been determined.
The puzzle is of the unfinished word type wherein onelettel' is omitted and such letter must be inserted in order tocomplete the word. The puzzle is not of the usual cross-word
type variety because the letters which must be supplied by thecontestants are only used to complete one word. Alongside the
puzzle are sentence clues and such sentence clues indicate the
two possible choices of letters which may be supplied in any
particular blank so as to complete such word. The contestant.
must decide which of the words formed by either of the two
letters given would be most acceptable in the sentence provided
as a clue. A sample sentence is "An elderly actor often looks
back fondly on the days when he star-ed in the theatre (r or t).'~
The contestants must, through their analytical ability, decide
which of the two possible words, starred or started, best completes the sentence in a logical manner. The correct solution and
correct anaylsis are subsequently published.
Article III, §23, State Const., and §849.09, F. S., prohibit the
operation of lotteries in this state.
A lottery involves three elements, viz: (1) an award by
chance, (2) a prize, and (3) a consideration.
The element of prize is explicit in the above-described scheme.
It would appear, however, that the awarding of the prize is dependent, predominantly, upon skill rather than chance. This office
has indicated that limerick contests and certain question-answer
contests are so predominantly dependent upon skill rather than
chance that the schemes in which such contests were involved
did not violate the lottery laws of this state. See AGO 057-356,
Nov. 13, 1957 and AGO 054-213, 1953-54 biennial reports, p. 661.
It would appear that the puzzle contest enclosed with your
letter exercises the contestants' analytical skill to such an extent
that this analytical skill will determine the winner rather than
any contestant's particular luck.
This particular contest requires that the contestants choose
between two words to determine which of such words completes
a sentence in the most logical manner. An initial impression
would indicate to the contestants that either of the two words
are acceptable. However, a thorough analysis will reveal that
one word is more desirable than the other. Of course, if the contestant is allowed to submit several different entries, the contestant is not required to exercise his skill in order to win but:
624
BIENNIAL REPORT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
may, instead, change his entries so as to cover all or most of
the situations. Therefore, if this particular scheme is not to be
of a questionable nature, each contestant should be allowed to
submit one entry only. Also, if the number of sentences required
to be analyzed was a minimum, luck would be a predominant
factor. However, such circumstance is not present wherein as in
the sample" puzzle, there are 26 sentences. With 26 sentences, the
chance of guessing all the correct answers is so minute that clearly.
the skillful contestant is well favored.
The determination that this particular contest involves predominantly skill rather than chance is based somewhat6n personal judgment. However, this office has tacitly made such determination in the past by sanctioning those puzzles conducted by
Florida newspapers which have been similar, if not identical in
nature, to the one analyzed by this opinion. This particular wordpuzzle contest contains an element of skill essentially similar to
the question and answer skills discussed in AGO 058-128. In
this word-puzzle contest, the contestant is required to answer the
question which words complete certain sentences in the most
logical manner.
If the characteristics of the word-puzzle contest are changed
so as to be beyond the comprehension and capacity of the general
public or in such a manner so as to create a guessing game rather
than one in which skill and judgment predominate, then the
rationale of this opinion would not be applicable. If the texture
of the word-puzzle contest is materially changed, such change
would require further consideration as to whether this contest
was legal. The sponsor is cautioned not to make the distinctions
in the puzzle so fine as to result in the majority of the contestants
submitting guesses rather than judgments, nor must the distinctions be so easy as to make the answers obvious.
062-156-November 21, 1962
TAXATION
INDIAN RESERVATION-OPERATION OF DRIVE-IN
THEATRE ON; LICENSES AND LICENSE TAXES§§285.01, 285.03, F. S.
To: Ray E. Green, State Comptroller, Tallahassee
QUESTION:
Are the operators of drive-in theatres, open to the
general public, operated on lands leased from the Seminole tribe of Indians in Florida, with the consent and
approval of the secretary of the interior of the U. S.,
liable for the payment of state and county occupational
license taxes?
The leased lands appear to be a part of the Seminole Indian
reservation and were leased to the operator of the drive-in
theatre by the Seminole tribe in Florida with the approval of the
secretary of the interior or his authorized representative. A
Seminole Indian reservation of lands in Florida was recognized
by an act of congress approved July 20, 1956, Ch. 645, 70 Stat.
581, which act declared the said lands to be "held in trust for
the Seminole tribe of Indians in the state of Florida" under the
authority of the U. S. There exists, largely in Broward county,
under §285.01 and §285.03, F. S., state Indian reservations. Under