The Indiana Supreme Court will hear arguments in three cases Wednesday, including whether a casino can ban someone who counts
cards.
Thomas P. Donovan sued the Grand Victoria Casino & Resort after the casino banned him from playing regulated blackjack
because he counts cards. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the casino, but Donovan argued he never attempted
to hide the card counting and it's not cheating or prohibited by gaming law or administrative rules. The Indiana Court
of Appeals reversed, finding the Indiana Gaming Commission hadn't enacted a provision that bans card counting, and Grand
Victoria can't simply take refuge in the common law right of exclusion.
Arguments begin at 9 a.m. in Thomas P. Donovan v. Grand Victoria Casino & Resort, No. 49S02-1003-CV-124.
The high court will also hear a defamation suit and an appeal of battery and strangulation convictions. Arguments begin at
9:45 a.m. in Christine Dugan v. Mittal Steel, USA Inc., et al., No. 45S05-1002-CV-121. Christine Dugan sued
her employer Mittal Steel and employee Jay Komorowski for defamation after she was fired following an investigation into an
alleged theft ring in her department. She was reinstated after an arbitrator found there wasn't enough evidence to support
that she defrauded Mittal. She then filed her suit.
The appellate court affirmed summary judgment for Mittal and Jay Komorowski as to the statements described in Paragraph 6
of Dugan's complaint for defamation and reversed summary judgment in favor of Mittal and Komorowski as to Paragraph 7
of Dugan's complaint. The Court of Appeals remanded for further proceedings on that portion of her defamation claim because
Mittal failed to establish as a matter of law that the statement is protected by the common interest privilege.
At 10:30 a.m. the justices will hear Giavonni J. Williams v. State of Indiana, No. 02A03-0908-CR-363. Giavonni
Williams appeals his convictions of strangulation and battery and the denial of his motion to separate witnesses. On March
17, the high court determined Williams' case warrants oral argument on whether the state adequately overcame the presumption
of prejudice stemming from the denial of the motion for separation of witnesses.
All arguments will be webcast live at https://mycourts.in.gov/arguments/ .














Conversations
0 Comments
Add Comment