At first, I thought “lol that’s a nope” It sounds like it became serious…
But my question is why did he wait so long to see a doc? he should have gone to the ER immediately …not doing that is what will get it tossed out …
what yall think ?
Irrespective of what he may or may not have been drugged with, Nevada law forbids a casino from allowing visibly inebriated people to gamble. If it was as obvious as this story suggests that he was not in his right mind, he may have a strong case.
These sorts of cases have been made before and in some cases, the casinos saw fit to settle, and that suggests to me that they must be at least somewhat afraid of losing.
What’s an OCCA?
Now if he’d stuck to the “gentlemen’s clubs” there’d have been no issue. No matter how drunk your scrawl on the charge slip, you’re liable for every lap dance and bottle of “champagne”.
My late first wife was an attorney in Las Vegas, one of whose customers was a bank that did a lot of merchant accounts for “gentlemen’s” clubs. You’d perhaps be surprised at how many corporate accounting departments attempt to dispute charges later on behalf of fatcat employees of theirs wielding company credit cards. It never works. Or at least it never did back in our day.
See the tits? Pay the chits.
Words to live (and profit) by.
@sampti Orange County CAlifornia…
It’s OC CA, with a space between. Orange county, California. [Note the newspaper article is from the Orange County Register–so the newspaper was undoubtedly playing up the local connection.]
Cool, so he’s from Ocka? (Is that the way you pronounce it?)
Can I be from WIWI (Why Why)?
Wautawaunee Inlet, Wisconsin
According to that story, he was with an entourage of friends the whole time - who apparently didn’t feel the need to intervene. That must surely weaken his case.
With a roulette wheel, there’s no skill or strategy that changes your expected return. But he was playing blackjack, where I think there is a huge difference between optimal play and stupid play? And I think blackjack is played with all cards face up, because the dealer strictly follows an algorithm for their own cards? There will surely be video of him playing. The decisions he made during play should be strong evidence - whether he was making stupid plays and thus obviously impaired, or making the usual optimal plays of a regular player (if the latter presumably with very bad luck).
At the point when you’re deciding on your play, only one of the dealer’s cards is up. The dealer doesn’t turn their other card over and hit or stand as required until the players have all stood, resigned, or busted, and doesn’t look at their hole card unless the card they can see is an ace or a face, because a dealer blackjack is an automatic win for the house.
He filed the suit almost two years after the incident. I doubt the casino keeps surveillance tapes for that long. Googling around is showing a lot of different numbers, between 30 days and 6 months, but I don’t find anything that says they keep tapes for as much as 2 years.
I doubt any casino has been keeping its security footage on tapes for decades now - it’s all digital these days, so how far back they have recordings is solely dependent on how much storage space they have on their hard drives.
Yes of course, but the point remains, they are not going to pay for the storage (whether it’s tapes or disks) to keep years of footage if it doesn’t benefit them and there’s no regulatory reason to do so.
If you can memorize the Basic Strategy tables of when to hit, stay, split, or double, you can minimize the house’s edge. If you can count cards you can do even better, but casinos tend to throw people out and ban them if they believe you’re counting, and modern innovations like continuous shoes make it pretty much impossible anyway.
The last time I was in Vegas there were free cards stating the Basic Strategy given out by the casino.
They still have an edge even if you follow the strategy.
Which casino? I only make it out there once every few years, but that’s not something I’ve seen on the Strip or on Fremont.
Naturally. The house would never offer a game that wasn’t inherently tilted in their favor. IIRC, you can completely eliminate the house’s edge in craps if you have a sufficient bank and bet in a certain way, but I’ve never gone to Vegas with nearly enough money to try it, and the pure randomness of the game would probably wreck you in the long run anyway.
Even assuming the vid exists, as covered by other posters …
If the vid shows him falling off his stool, knocking over his chips, looking glazed, etc., sure, that’d be evidence he was “obviously impaired”.
The idea that him playing unskillfully would itself a) be evidence of impairment that b) a casino would be regulatorily required to act on, seems pretty fanciful. You’re allowed to be a rube in a casino. In fact it’s encouraged. Whether or not this guy usually plays skillfully isn’t the point.
Not much, what’s an OCCA with you?
Right. The impairment would lead to him continuing betting and betting big, after he had lost more than he should have. I speak from experience. My bad nights in casinos were because I played poor strategy, but because I didn’t quit when I should have.
Either way. The casino has no obligation to, and no reason to, consider how you play as part of an evaluation of sobriety.