Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448

2018 Georgia Code 50-27-2 | Car Wreck Lawyer

Link to State of Georgia Official Statute 2018 Georgia Code Annotated (sourced from legal.resource.org)
O.C.G.A. 50-27-2 Case Law from Google Scholar Amendments to OCGA 50-27-2

TITLE 50 STATE GOVERNMENT

Section 27. Lottery for Education, 50-27-1 through 50-27-104.

ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS

50-27-2. Legislative findings and declarations.

It is found and declared by the General Assembly:

  1. That net proceeds of lottery games conducted pursuant to this chapter shall be used to support improvements and enhancements for educational purposes and programs and that such net proceeds shall be used to supplement, not supplant, existing resources for educational purposes and programs;
  2. That lottery games are an entrepreneurial enterprise and that the state shall create a public body, corporate and politic, known as the Georgia Lottery Corporation, with comprehensive and extensive powers as generally exercised by corporations engaged in entrepreneurial pursuits;
  3. That lottery games shall be operated and managed in a manner which provides continuing entertainment to the public, maximizes revenues, and ensures that the lottery is operated with integrity and dignity and free of political influence; and
  4. That the Georgia Lottery Corporation shall be accountable to the General Assembly and to the public through a system of audits and reports.

(Code 1981, §50-27-2, enacted by Ga. L. 1992, p. 3173, § 2.)

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Georgia Lottery Corporation entitled to assert sovereign immunity.

- Georgia Lottery Corporation (GLC) is entitled to assert sovereign immunity as a bar to a suit under Ga. Const. 1983, Art. I, Sec. II, Para. IX, and the Georgia Tort Claims Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-21-20 et seq., because under the Georgia Lottery for Education Act, O.C.G.A. § 50-27-1 et seq., the purpose, function, and management of the GLC are indelibly intertwined with the state in a manner that qualifies the GLC for the protection of sovereign immunity as a state instrumentality; thus, the GLC must be classified as an instrumentality of the state to which sovereign immunity applies. Kyle v. Ga. Lottery Corp., 290 Ga. 87, 718 S.E.2d 801 (2011).

Tampering.

- Defendant's act of leaning over a store counter, tearing lottery tickets from the ticket's dispenser without paying for the tickets, and scratching the tickets to see if the defendant had won a prize fell within the plain meaning of the term "tampering" in O.C.G.A. § 50-27-27, in that the defendant's act forever changed the odds of winning for paying customers and directly influenced the potential winning of lottery prizes by future customers. If the defendant's activity did not constitute "tampering" within the meaning of § 50-27-27, the express intent of the Georgia General Assembly in § 50-27-2 that state lottery revenues be maximized and that the lottery be operated with integrity and dignity would be frustrated. Doe v. State, 290 Ga. 667, 725 S.E.2d 234 (2012).

Cases Citing O.C.G.A. § 50-27-2

Total Results: 2  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Kyle v. Georgia Lottery Corp., 290 Ga. 87 (Ga. 2011).

Cited 19 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Nov 21, 2011 | 718 S.E.2d 801, 2011 Fulton County D. Rep. 3612

...enerate net proceeds to be “used to support improvements and enhancements for educational purposes and programs and that such net proceeds shall be used to supplement, not supplant, existing resources for educational purposes and programs.” OCGA § 50-27-2 (1)....
...Governor,” OCGA § 50-27-5 (a), and its net proceeds are distributed directly to the State treasury. OCGA § 50-27-13 (b) (2). Finally, GLC is “accountable to the General Assembly and to the public through a system of audits and reports.” OCGA § 50-27-2 (4)....
Copy

Doe v. State, 290 Ga. 667 (Ga. 2012).

Cited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Mar 5, 2012 | 725 S.E.2d 234, 2012 Fulton County D. Rep. 748

...He stole the tickets by leaning over a store counter and tearing the tickets from their dispenser. He scratched the tickets to see if he had won a prize, and, when he saw that he had not, he threw all of the tickets away. Doe was indicted for “Falsely Uttering a State Lottery Ticket” *668under OCGA § 50-27-27. Specifically, Doe was accused of taking approximately 65 scratch-off tickets “with the intent to influence the winning of Georgia Lottery prizes by tampering with lottery materials.” See OCGA § 50-27-27 (b)....
...This Court granted Doe’s petition for a writ of certiorari to determine whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding that the theft of lottery tickets from a lottery ticket dispenser was sufficient to constitute tampering with lottery materials within the meaning of OCGA § 50-27-27. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. Our decision in this case turns on the proper interpretation of OCGA § 50-27-27 (b)....
...re surplusage. At the same time, we must seek to effectuate the intent of the legislature. (Citations omitted.) Slakman v. Continental Cas. Co., 277 Ga. 189, 191 (587 SE2d 24) (2003). Pursuant to the Georgia Lottery for Education Act (of which OCGA § 50-27-27 is a part), the Georgia Legislature has expressly provided “[t]hat lottery games shall be operated and managed in a manner which provides continuing entertainment to the public, maximizes revenues, and ensures that the lottery is operated with integrity and dignity.” OCGA § 50-27-2 (3). It is with this express legislative intent in mind that we must discern the plain meaning of the term “tampering” in OCGA § 50-27-27....
...by scratching off his stolen tickets and discarding them when he realized that his improper efforts to influence the winning of a lottery prize had failed. In short, if Doe’s activity did not constitute “tampering” within the meaning of OCGA § 50-27-27, the express intent of the Legislature that State lottery revenues be maximized and that the lottery be operated with integrity and dignity would be frustrated. OCGA § 50-27-2. We therefore decline to adopt such an interpretation of OCGA § 50-27-27, as it would “emasculate the purpose of the statute [and] impair the intention of the legislature.” Andrews v. State, 8 Ga. App. 700, 701 (70 SE 111) (1911). By tampering with lottery materials in the manner that he did, Doe could properly be found guilty of violating OCGA § 50-27-27....