An Indiana casino cannot stop someone from playing regulated blackjack simply because he counts cards, the Indiana Court
of Appeals ruled today.
In its unanimous decision in Thomas P. Donovan v. Grand Victoria Casino & Resort, L.P., No. 49A02-0903-CV-259,
a three-judge panel ruled in favor of Thomas P. Donovan, who challenged a Southern Indiana riverboat casino's decision
to ban him from playing blackjack there.
A self-taught "advantage player" who uses blackjack to supplement his income, Thomas Donovan played at the Grand
Victoria casino in Rising Sun for about three months in 2006 under an agreement with a floor supervisor, saying that he maintain
a $25 per-hand betting limit. But when a new supervisor took over, Donovan was told he was no longer welcome to play blackjack
there. The 50-year-old, semi-retired computer programmer sued the casino in Marion Superior Court; the casino won earlier
this year when Marion Superior Judge Robyn Moberly granted it summary judgment.
Donovan appealed, arguing that he never attempted to hide his card counting and that the practice isn't cheating or prohibited
by gaming law or administrative rule. Casino attorneys argued that Grand Victoria is "a private amusement" that
doesn't have to accept anyone who visits; attorneys cited a 1994 appeals court decision backing a shopping mall's
right to bar a customer and said casinos have the same right.
But the appellate panel disagreed, saying that precedent from Wilhoite v. Melvin Simon & Associates Inc., 640
N.E.2d 382, 385 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994), doesn't apply in this case because of the Indiana Gaming Commission's statutory
rule-making authority of casinos.
Siding with Donovan's points, the court granted summary judgment on his request for declaratory judgment to the effect
that Grand Victoria may not exclude him from playing blackjack because of his card counting. The judges relied on a New Jersey
case, Uston v. Resorts Int'l Hotel Inc., 89 N.J. 163, 445 A.2d 370 (1982), involving a card counter who was also
expelled from a casino there.
The General Assembly gave the Indiana Gaming Commission rule-making authority to balance the respective rights of private
property owners and the patron, the court wrote, but it didn't outright ban the card-counting practice.
"Grand Victoria may not simply take refuge in the common law right of exclusion, inasmuch as is the public policy of
this State that gambling is subject to 'strict regulation'... and the Commission has been given the exclusive authority
to set rules of riverboat casino games," the court wrote. "The Commission did not enact a provision against card
counting and Grand Victoria did not seek a prohibition by rule amendment. No law, regulation, or duly promulgated rule advised
Donovan that the skill of card counting was prohibited."














With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.
Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone
John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.
In regards to bill's comment about trusting the cover meant. We can trust them about as much as we can trust attorneys'.
This is disturbing to learn...