ILNews

Justices rule in favor of casinos

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share


The Indiana Supreme Court has given casinos a double win today, saying the businesses can ban card-counting and also that state statute doesn’t allow patrons to recover for losses they might incur because of problem gambling.

A pair of decisions came today in Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Genevieve M. Kephart, No. 31S01-0909-CV-403, and Thomas P. Donovan v. Grand Victoria Casino & Resort, No. 49S02-1003-CV-00124.

Justice Robert D. Rucker wrote the Kephart decision, which held no common law right exists for patrons to recover damages for casino gambling losses. This reverses a decision from Harrison Circuit Court. Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard and Justice Frank Sullivan concurred while Justices Theodore Boehm concurred in result and Justice Brent Dickson dissented.

In Donovan, Justice Sullivan wrote for the four-justice majority. Justice Rucker didn’t participate in the decision. The court ruled that state riverboat gambling statutes don’t allow a common law right for card-counting patrons to gamble in the casinos and the establishments can exclude those individuals.

Justice Dickson, in another dissent, wrote that he agreed with the Court of Appeals that the casino shouldn’t be allowed to exclude the plaintiff from playing blackjack.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

ADVERTISEMENT