Opinion ID: 2754130
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Alphanumeric or similar designations are

Text: randomly drawn and announced one by one. First the pace of the game is not controlled by an actual physical living announcer or caller of the randomly drawn Bingo Balls. The Bingo numbers are randomly selected by a computer chip or a chip located in the mother board of the server. This computer controls the speed of the draws, which is by its nature rapid and faster than any 'caller' could recognize. Considering the amendment in question on a narrow basis required by Cornerstone and precedent cases, this factor is not satisfied at any of the machine stations identified. HEDA argues in its brief to this Court that the trial court erred by finding that the games were not bingo on the ground that they are not conducted by an actual physical, living announcer or caller who randomly draws and announces, one-by-one, the applicable alphanumeric designations. We reject HEDA's argument. First, the second element itself, as set out above, implicitly contemplates a caller of the nature described by the trial court: Alphanumeric or similar designations are randomly drawn and announced one by one. 42 So. 3d at 86. This is particularly true in the context of our understanding, as expressed in Cornerstone, that the game commonly or traditionally known as bingo is one that, by its nature, involves meaningful human interaction. Furthermore, however, we made specific reference in the fifth element 19 1130388 stated in Cornerstone to the requirement that a player who believes he or she has won a game of bingo must declare this fact to the other players and the announcer. We also noted in Greenetrack, Inc., that, in Cornerstone, we explained that, among other things, the game commonly or traditionally known as bingo involved 'each player' utilizing a 'card' with a certain pattern and universe of alphanumeric or other designations and that each player must respond to the random drawings of these designations by an 'announcer' by manually marking this card. ___ So. 3d at ___ (footnote omitted) (citing Cornerstone, 42 So. 3d at 86). See also, e.g., Bingo Bank, Inc. v. Strom, 268 S.C. 498, 502, 234 S.E.2d 881, 883 (1977) (explaining that [t]he game of bingo is played by the use of a 'Caller' who announces, one at a time, numbers drawn at random from a container into which has been placed numbered balls or objects for that purpose). HEDA argues, as it does in response to many of the trial court's findings, that if an actual living, physical announcer is required, this criterion can never be met by an electronic game and there would be no reason to apply Cornerstone to any machine or electronic device. HEDA's 20 1130388 brief, at 47. HEDA misunderstands the central import of our holding in Cornerstone and the cases decided since then: The game of bingo is in fact the game commonly or traditionally known as bingo, i.e., one that does involve meaningful human interaction in a group setting, not one that is played within the circuitry of electronic machinery. As to the third element in Cornerstone, the trial court stated: