Litigation
Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Kephart
In October 2010, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled against a woman who said an area casino preyed on her gambling addiction. Jenny Kephart filed a lawsuit against Caesars Indiana in 2007 after the casino sued her to recover $125,000 that she lost in a single night of gambling in the year before. The casino is now Horseshoe Southern Indiana.
Kephart said the casino enticed her to gamble with free meals and rooms as well as money on credit. The casino even sent a car to drive her from her home in Tennessee to the Indiana casino. Below are the legal briefs from Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Kephart.
Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Kephart – Appellant Brief
Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Kephart – Brief of Apellee
Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Kephart – Appellee’s Petition to Transfer
Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Kephart – Appellee’s Petition for Rehearing
Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Kephart – Appellee’s Petition to Transfer Reply Brief
Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Kephart – Appellant’s Brief of Response to Petition to Transfer
Caesars Riverboat Casino v. Kephart – Reply Brief of Appellant
Hoffman v. Sandia Resort & Casino, NM
On October 6, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the New Mexico Court of Appeals decision in Hoffman v. Sandia Resort & Casino. The case involves a New Mexico man who reportedly won $1.6 million dollars at one of the casino’s slot machines. However, the Sandia Pueblo tribe, which owns the casino, informed Hoffman that the payout would not be made because the slot machine had malfunctioned. Arguing before courts in New Mexico, the tribe claimed Hoffman had no legal recourse because of the tribe’s sovereign immunity. Courts in New Mexico supported the tribe’s position and concluded that tribal immunity can only be waived “for purposes of providing a remedy to casino patrons who suffer physical injury to their persons or property.” These decisions seem to suggest that there is no legal remedy for casino patrons who have suffered financial injury because of wrongdoing at tribal casinos.
Please read the opinion of the New Mexico Court of Appeals below.
Hoffman vs. Sandia Resort and Casino
Piercey Estate v. Atlantic Lotto Corporation
In the 2008 Canadian Supreme Court Case, Piercey Estate v. Atlantic Lotto Corporation, Inc., the plaintiffs argued that video lottery terminals (VLT’s, or video slot machines) are designed to be “inherently deceptive, inherently addictive, and inherently dangerous, when used as intended, without any information or warning.” The plaintiffs’ daughter in this case, Susan Piercey, “lost her life due to the deceptions designed into VLT games, which led to addiction and suicide.” They made the case that the Atlantic Lotto Corporation (ALC) violated the Trade Practices Act, which had originally been put in place to protect consumers from unfair trade practices. The plaintiffs went on to say that “in modern government, government through agencies and corporations are interfering more and more with the consumer and, as such, it makes sense to have the governments responsible for their own actions or actions of its agents.” The justice presiding over this case, however, determined that because the ALC is an agent of the Canadian government, they are not bound by the restrictions of the Trade Practices Act.
Below is the decision of the case and a press release from the attorneys representing the Piercey estate.
Piercey Estate v. Atlantic Lotto Corporation
Press Release – Piercey Estate v. Atlantic Lotto Corporation
Tobacco-Style Lawsuits Against the Predatory Gambling Trade
Professor John Kindt explores the idea of states bringing lawsuits against predatory gambling operators, a strategy that worked over time with the tobacco companies. Kindt writes: “Owing to costs created by new addicted gamblers, bankruptcies, and crime once gambling is legalized, some have argued that gambling establishments should be held liable for the costs they place on society.”
Exposing the Truth About the Predatory Gambling Business Through the Judicial System
Professor John Kindt suggests that subpoenaing predatory gambling operators could reveal the truth behind the business, since “the historical record indicates that decriminalized organized gambling activities invariably lead to new addicted gamblers, new bankruptcies, and new crime and corruption.”
Subpoenaing Information from the Gambling Industry
A Look at Lawsuits Against the Predatory Gambling Business
In this 2004 Mercer Law Review article, Professor John Kindt details the extraordinary methods of predatory gambling operators (and their allies) to hide harmful, and potentially illegal, business practices. Kindt states that “insiders” from the industry need to come forward so the public can truly understand what goes on.
“The Insiders” for Gambling Lawsuits