Man sues casino after losing $500,000

[winbig]

Casinos are less likely to "cut someone off" than a bar would. A bar would be held liable for someone drinking too much then going out and driving, killing someone in the process. Why should a casino not be held liable for their actions as well?

 

[AC7X]

There are 2 sides to every story and we only know 1. The guy says he was severed 20 drinks during 17 hours of gambling. I'm a light weight and that would not make me stupid drunk. I think he is a lying piece of crap who is trying to get out of this debt and is using his money and attorneys to smear the good name of this casino in the media.
The eye in the sky does not lie, so I guess we will know soon enough.

I know 20 drinks over 17 hours = less than one drink per hour and doesn't sound like a lot, but factor in the exhaustion element and you could be extremely intoxicated in those circumstances. I can handle my drink fairly well, but if I've not slept for 24 hours a couple of beers is enough to do it.

I think until we know the outcome of the investigation it's all speculation at this stage, the nitty gritty details do make a difference in this situation. I think it's safe to say that blame lies with both parties; he shouldn't have put himself in that vulnerable situation, but equally the casino does have social responsibilities which are outlined in law, and they failed to meet them.

Just my 2p.

 

[rshkrn]

Don't you need to to "sign" in order to get that kind of credit?? And he seemed to get a few additional credit lines with the last one for 250K, when he was totally out of control....just wondering what kind of person can sign correctly being that drunk?

IMO the casino should have just refused him the credit if he was that drunk....that would have automatically capped the betting.....they could've kept on pouring tho....

 

[chuchu59]

He played paigow which involves setting of tiles and should he have been intoxicated to such an extent that he couldn't even set the tiles properly then he does have a case. There should have been videos on his play.

 

[Igor82]

I'm wondering if this guy had woken up after his binge and realized he had won $500k; would he have brought it back to the casino and said, "Sorry, I was drinking and shouldn't have been playing. You can have your money back."? I think not.

He can't own up to his own problems, and other people have to suffer for it.

If i read the article correctly, we was too drunk to stand up and the casino kept serving him drinks. The law states that the casinos must stop a player from further gambling when he shows clear signs of inebriation. If it is true that he was dropping chips all over the place and wasn't able to read his cards right (and that's a big if which will show from security tapes), then the casino will face a very difficult case to justify those losses and win the money back as they were in breach of regulation.

In fact, the Nevada Gaming Control Board is now investigating the Downtown Grand, formerly the Lady Luck Casino, on whether it violated gaming regulations, said Karl Bennison, chief of the board's enforcement division.
Those regulations prohibit casinos from "permitting persons who are visibly intoxicated to participate in gaming activity" and from providing "complimentary service of intoxicating beverages in the casino area to persons who are visibly intoxicated."
"We are investigating this thoroughly," Bennison said. "We are aware of this matter. We'll see if there are regulation violations."

If truly he was so red-nosed he couldn't sit upright properly this wasn't a case of owning up to your losses; and it would be doubtful that if in such a state there ever was a potential outcome of him coming out "on top", playing blackjack which does take some sanity and skill.

To add insult to injury, he didn't deposit the money - they gave him a half a million credit line, which make the whole durnk-or-not situation much worse from the casino side IMO.

It's sounds like a case of another sore lose, but it may not be as clear cut as it appears if it does come to light he was indeed sloshed.

 

[Tirilej]

Since everything is recorded from these casinos, then they all maybe can go through their tapes every night.
If they see someone that have managed to play and win even though they were more drunk then they should have been allowed to be, they can sue them to get the winnings back.
They do have the proof needed

 

[AC7X]

Since everything is recorded from these casinos, then they all maybe can go through their tapes every night.
If they see someone that have managed to play and win even though they were more drunk then they should have been allowed to be, they can sue them to get the winnings back.
They do have the proof needed

But that regulation isn't for the player, it's for the casino.

EDIT TO CLARIFY: It's the casino's responsibility to ensure that players don't play whilst intoxicated, and if they fail to do so then the player has some recourse (or so it would seem, we'll find out at the end of this court case). If the casino fails to meet this requirement, and the player wins, they can't blame the player. But if the casino fails to meet the requirement, and the player loses, then they can (to some extent) blame the casino.

 

[Igor82]

Since everything is recorded from these casinos, then they all maybe can go through their tapes every night.
If they see someone that have managed to play and win even though they were more drunk then they should have been allowed to be, they can sue them to get the winnings back.
They do have the proof needed

The game of choice plays a big part. Drunk guy chucking all on 17 has exactly the same outcome as a straight guy doing it. Ball spins and it either lands on 17 or not. In that case, sanity is only relevant to a decision to stake a wager and the rest is up to Lady Luck (pun only semi-indented lol).

A drunk guy having to manoeuvre tiles, or having to make a decision of "stand or hit" means that the player must have some sanity which not only influences whether he makes a wager or not and it's size, but also influences whether he has sufficient wit about him to make the choices that control the outcome to his best interest.

Playing BJ & Pai drunk is a whole different kettle of fish than spinning slots drunk. Games of skill (or semi-skill) need even more stringent regulations than pure luck outcome games.

 

[Tirilej]

I hope you both know that I was just being ironic

No matter the outcome all landbased casinos will maybe be a bit more careful in the future, and if so then it happened for a good reason anyway.

I've never been to a real casino so I know nothing about how they works. One day maybe

 

[winbig]

Don't you need to to "sign" in order to get that kind of credit?? And he seemed to get a few additional credit lines with the last one for 250K, when he was totally out of control....just wondering what kind of person can sign correctly being that drunk?

IMO the casino should have just refused him the credit if he was that drunk....that would have automatically capped the betting.....they could've kept on pouring tho....

There's actually been cases in atlantic city regarding this same thing. There's been casinos that's sued gamblers because they claim they were fed drinks all night long and never cut off.

The final ruling was that, while the casino didn't get all of the money coming to them, the money they gave out via credit when the gambler was severely intoxicated was denied. Why? They were of "sound mind" to enter into a binding, legal, contract.

edit: lol, didn't realize this post was so old. I just found this information out last week and it pertains to the thread, so.....

 

[TheAddict]

i woke up one morning with a stinking hellfire hangover after visiting grosvenor for a 50 player poker tournament the night before. .
Waking up, and after about a minute of groaning i had a flashback of blackjack (i know the basics but no more). My heart started beating as i thought oh shit i won on that poker tourney, but i do not recall sitting down at a blackjack table. I have sat down at them a couple of times, but i'd be on the £1 min bet tables due to not being rich and not being great at the game.
Later found out from my friend who came that i'd sat down alone at a £5 min bet table and was so drunk i was taking an age between hands, dropping chips, putting my nose through the cards so i could get a good view of the numbers on them (luckily no-one else was on the table for me to annoy) and aparantly it was pissing the female dealer off quite visibly, so she must of known how badly drunk i was. I'd sat there for nearing an hour apparantly, so god knows how i managed to only lose £10, being the only player vs the dealer the whole time.

i'm usualy good at bankroll management, making ok out of the land based fruities over the years, doing well in Texas NLH, and never touching casino/bookies type fobts let alone a card game i'm not experienced in for anything more than £1 a hand. i have a feeling i only sat down at that table because the woman was buff, and if it was just because i wanted a gamble and had lost it all i would of just blamed myself. but after reading this i would like to sue grosvenor for a tenner. If a rep is reading this, Free chip with no wagering will do.

 

[Casino2014man]

Did the guy win the case?

Tried looking online, could not see anything!

Drinking and gambling for me always ends one way..

 

[Batman]

Did the guy win the case?

Tried looking online, could not see anything!

Drinking and gambling for me always ends one way..

You're not the only one...

 

[winbig]

Still under investigation....

but....

Meanwhile, Johnston was slapped with criminal charges for taking those loans from the casino and being unable to pay them back. His attorney said Tuesday they're trying to get those charges dismissed. "They're using them to try and extort me and scare me. I'm not scared," Johnston said.

If he was legally intoxicated when he signed the documents to get a line of credit (I'm assuming more than once,) the casino has no case. As I mentioned in my previous post, you can't enter into a legally binding agreement if you're in that state of mind...

Playing devil's advocate, here....Say he won....he wouldn't be complaining one bit...lol

Outdated URL (Invalid)