Casino to sue gamblers for winning...

What sort of idiot was the dealer? That's who they should be suing if anyone

davet82 wrote: »

they should counter sue the casino for withholding the money and for the tatics they used on restraining the gamblers during their 'investigation'

idk if its common practice in casinos when unusal or large amounts of money are won?

It's common enough I reckon. It's not unheard of for casinos to flatly refuse to pay out on winnings even if they just suspect that something is amiss, and afaik there's not a hell of a lot that the punters can do about it either. Those places are a law unto themselves for a large part. I never really understood why people are willing to spend so much money to travel to these places just so they can lose even more of it.

themadchef wrote: »

What exactly could the dealer do about it?

Even the 6 security staff couldint figure out why the cards were coming in the order they were coming.

THe dealers are very well trained to deal with most situations that arise, clearly this was a very unusual one. Management would have had issues if it were to call time on the game. To call stop on a table that is a "winning" would have huge fall backs for a casino, especially if they didint know why it was winning in the first place.

If the dealer was that well trained then they should have copped on to the problem before the punters did. The dealer is only one cog in it too.. there would also be a floor person overlooking them, and a pit-boss overlooking the floor persons. They could have easily halted the game had they copped on to what was happening, and it would have caused a lot less problems for all involved than the road they chose to go down instead.. falsely imprisoning people etc.

So... will the gamblers be refuded their initial stakes? Seeins as they were gambling legitamately and fairly, when they had no chance of winning?

Its the classic thing ... casinos dont want people winning.

The casino lost a million because of THEIR blunder. But the casino isnt also saying how much money they made that week.

MadsL wrote: »

I take it you have never heard of a Gaming Commission. Casinos in the US are the exact opposite of a "law unto themselves" and are highly regulated and subject to huge Compliance requirements and regulations. They are also subject to regular and often unannounced inspection.



Casino security and Gaming commission staff have the authority to hold for investigation people suspected of cheating.

I wonder if they would have physically restrained a member of the public in their hotel room against their will, and without food or water for 8 hours during such an inspection.. considering that the people were not responsible for the casino failing to realise that a blunder had been made somewhere along the line.

There's a big difference between cheating and taking advantage of the lack of oversight by another party. Casinos take advantage of people all the time.. they have no right to punish or otherwise intimidate people for failing to properly exercise their own safeguards.

i dont think it's about cheating it's under this law that they plan on suing

they are relying on a law designed to protect gamblers from unscrupulous casinos. New Jersey law insists that odds for all games be fair, but the rule applies to the casinos as much as it does the punters. Given that the odds were stacked in favour of the punters, the casino is hoping to escape their huge bill.

CreepingDeath wrote: »

Jaysus... the casino committed criminal offenses, illegal detention & assault.
I think there's definite counter-claims possible there!

I think you are reading a lot of quotes from these peoples lawyers who are looking for compensation.

What criminal offence did the casino commit? A casino has the right to detain you if they suspect cheating. Their house, their rules.

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2010/Bills/S0500/12_R4.PDF

121. Authority of Gaming Licensee and Agents to Detain or Question
Persons; Immunity from Liability; Posted Notice Required.
a. Any licensee or its officers, employees or agents may question any
individual in the casino or simulcasting facility or elsewhere in the
establishment who is reasonably suspected of violating any of the
provisions of sections 113 through 116 of P.L.1977, c.110 (C.5:12-113
through 116), section 46 of P.L.1991, c.182 (C.5:12-113.1), section 118 of
P.L.1977, c.110 (C.5:12-118), section 119 of P.L.1977, c.110 (C.5:12-119)
or R.S.33:1-81 pursuant to subsection d. of section 103 of P.L.1977, c.110
(C.5:12-103). No licensee or its officers, employees or agents shall be
criminally or civilly liable by reason of any such questioning.

As to assault, I think you need to read a definition of assault. Reasonable force in detaining someone is not assault.

davet82 wrote: »

Stay in your hotel room with no food or water though sounds 'against their will', i'd rather the police turn up especially when i've done nothing legally wrong.

These guys would have been free to call the police at any time, the police would have upheld the casino's right to detain.

Thats a fine line too. Casinos are well known for coercing people to gamble, my experince in vegas was the more i lost the more free drink i got.

I think you need to look up the definition of "coerce" and "hospitality" - one means a gun to your head, the other a drink in your hand. There's a reason I don't drink and gamble, but I don't blame the casino for offering.

yes but the bank wouldnt try sue me!

They would if you failed to return the cash.

I think it stinks, the house always wins and for once the little guy walks away with some cash because of their mistake and to take legal action is wrong imo.

The house doesn't always win, otherwise there would be no point in gambling. However Gaming Commissions were set up to ensure that the house was fair for gamblers and to protect the house from cheats. I'm suprised that the pitboss didn't shut this game down when it was clear the cards were unshuffled; but the players knowingly raised their bets to the maximum.

Not exactly the same thing but if i slipped on a wet supermarket floor and damaged it, should the supermarket sue me for their negligence?

Strange analogy - Lets say you slipped and noticed there was a crack and the tiles were loose. You started picking at it, pulling the tiles off one by one until you cleared all the loose tiles. I think this is closer to what they did.

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

I wonder how many casinos are still run my mobsters these days?
We all know back in the day vegas and atlantic city were mafia towns. But alot of the mafia went down in the 70s and 80s....

But then again, mafia is still around. :pac:

Been watching Casino recently?? Mobsters, do you call women 'broads'?

The Casino business in America is run by three groups.
1. Media moguls like MGM,
2. Native Americans
3. Wealthy net worth individuals like Trump or Wynn

It's not as easy as you think making a profit, casinos are hugely labour intensive and gamblers are fickle.

Last time I was in Reno, three major casinos had closed. Tropicana recently posted sizeable losses. - $4.8 million on net revenues of $155.2 million for the quarter ended March 31. That’s compared with a loss of $1.4 million on net revenue of $156.8 million in the first quarter of 2011.

Casinos in Dublin have regularly gone out of business.

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Be honest, your entire post was just to drop that in there wasnt it ...

If I was really boasting I'd mention that I'll be in Vegas in two weeks (#*excited*#) :D:D

dj jarvis wrote: »

no one boasts about going to reno

Never hear of Johnny Cash?