darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 270
  • Posts: 9552
January 12th, 2015 at 5:33:48 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler

Quote: sc15

Quote: Gandler

No. It shows the character of a person who abuses the system. I have been a long proponent of reverse action lawsuits, where if somebody files a lawsuit that fails they have to pay that to the defendant.



So if I get drunk Jump your fence and fall into your pool and sue you for not havin a high enough fence (this has happened), I hope you keep the same logic....

Quote:

Don't bring any moral discussions into this. This has to do with lawyers and courts. Morals have no place here.



I feel differently. But I am not a sellout to my values.

I hate lawsuits. And people who make a living baiting them. I feel not the slightest sympathy for this sham artist. I feel terrible for an honorable chaperone of responsible gaming such as CET have to struggle with such predators.



You might want to move out of the US then, where being a lawyer is a great profession.

There's also IS exactly what you want for a "reverse action lawsuit." It's called malicious prosecution. And there's also countersuits.

Also, if someone broke onto my property and fell into my pool and it looks like a situation where I'd be facing a lawsuit (e.g. they have an obvious injury or they're already unconscious. A situation that wouldn't be resolved by just pulling them out and telling them to beat it.), I would wait for them to die before calling anybody. It's much cheaper to deal with a corpse than a living plaintiff with injuries. (If the person dies, you might get a negligence lawsuit and settle for 5 figures. If they have brain damage and survive you could be on the hook for decades of medical expenses) It doesn't pay to be a good samaritan in the US.



Countersuits are different. Some countries force failed plaintiffs to pay the amount they were suing to the defendant. Ironically these countries rarely have frivolous lawsuits.

But you would let somebody die to save some money? being a good Samaritan should not have a price.

You attack me for siding with CET for performing their civic duty. And yet you are willing to let somebody die to save some money? It sounds like I am not the one with the skewed morals.... I find it ironic that I am viewed by some as the absurd one. But I guess have principle and honor is absurd to those with liberal values.

You are right, I don't enjoy lawsuit culture. The only ones who do are those who abuse the system.



Countries where the defendant must pay for the amount being sued for failed lawsuits obviously don't have any large suits.

Imagine if a little old lady on disability lost their lawsuit for millions in damages and now they had to pay that. LOL, a little old lady on welfare being on the hook for millions? What a waste of legislation that would be. Wonder how fast they would collect.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 270
  • Posts: 9552
January 12th, 2015 at 5:35:25 PM permalink
How about legislation where anyone who fails to win their lawsuit gets to sue the lawyer for losing
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
terapined
terapined
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 5903
January 12th, 2015 at 5:51:06 PM permalink
Quote: Gandler


You attack me for siding with CET for performing their civic duty.



Wouldn't it be a good civic duty for CET to do everything in their power to pay back the money they borrowed.
How honorable is it to play shuffle the assets game to avoid paying back those they borrowed from.
WOV supports censorship. Bring back free speech challenging lies.
teddys
teddys
Joined: Nov 14, 2009
  • Threads: 150
  • Posts: 5514
January 12th, 2015 at 8:46:30 PM permalink
Quote: terapined

Will CET be honorable this year and pay what they owe ????

Answer: HELL TO THE NO
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
Romes
Romes
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
  • Threads: 28
  • Posts: 5552
January 13th, 2015 at 9:45:28 AM permalink
Quote: Gandler

I care if he was looking for trouble. If he went into a casino where he knew he would likely get a cold reception because of past disputes, he knew and likely wanted what he was getting into. There are endless amounts of casinos in NV he could have tripped to, he chose to go to a CET casino. There is a reason for that.

You comment is the immature one. You are inferring lawsuit baiting is OK as long as it is legal. I disagree. He wanted a lawsuit. He wanted to cause trouble. This is not a hero. This is not a victim. This is somebody with an agenda, a predator devouring local businesses and destroying jobs.

He went in a casino where he knew his presence would cause drama. He cashed out just under 5k while 28 years old and refused to show ID and immediately made a scene demanding gaming officials to be called etc... The casino detained him and called the police.

CET acted properly to preserve the integrity of gaming transactions. We will see ultimately what the gaming commission states about the chips. But I will bet the crux of his lawsuit will focus on the supposed wrongful detainment, and not so much on the chips as that issue could be resolved without a lawsuit and likely would have been already...


As someone else already stated... So when African Americans staged sit-ins at "white only" restaurants, it was their fault they were arrested because they knew they would have a "cold reception," as you stated? Or they were drawing attention to a much bigger civil rights violation. Oh wait, that's what the AP is upset about, his civil rights being violated when the casino STEALS his money from him.

The rest of your comment... "He did nothing illegal but this is what he did!"
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 270
  • Posts: 9552
January 13th, 2015 at 10:23:57 AM permalink
Quote from Gandler:

"immediately made a scene demanding gaming officials to be called"

Really, Gandler, a person makes a scene when they ask for the official abiding commission to examine the situation? Instead, it was better the casino called the police because a citizen was making a ridiculous demand that the gaming commission get involved in a dispute--which happens to be an actual regulation in the Nevada statutes, that gaming be called in the matter of payout disputes?
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 1593
January 13th, 2015 at 11:06:50 AM permalink
Quote: Romes

As someone else already stated... So when African Americans staged sit-ins at "white only" restaurants, it was their fault they were arrested because they knew they would have a "cold reception," as you stated? Or they were drawing attention to a much bigger civil rights violation. Oh wait, that's what the AP is upset about, his civil rights being violated when the casino STEALS his money from him.

The rest of your comment... "He did nothing illegal but this is what he did!"



Are you really comparing casinos banning AP players to Businesses banning African Americans?

There are literally hundreds of other casinos he could have went to. He chose a casino he was on bad terms with to prove a point.

You say the casino stole his money?

What did the gaming commission day? Do they not have the power to foe the casino to give it back without a trial if the casino violated a rule?
mcallister3200
mcallister3200
Joined: Dec 29, 2013
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 3163
January 13th, 2015 at 11:27:28 AM permalink
For the most part, gaming seems to function like a public defender. They're supposed to be protecting integrity, but who pays their bills and who are they ultimately working for? I believe they are often " ballwashers" for the casino similar to police. If you believe gaming is there to protect the player/integrity, go read Grosjean's account of his interaction with gaming during his famous CP illegal detention and arrest that bankrupted Griffin. Can be found on Snyder's old blackjackforumonline.
Romes
Romes
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
  • Threads: 28
  • Posts: 5552
January 13th, 2015 at 11:40:33 AM permalink
Quote: Gandler

Are you really comparing casinos banning AP players to Businesses banning African Americans?


While the reasons are different are both not a situation in which someone's rights are being violated?

Quote: Gandler

There are literally hundreds of other casinos he could have went to. He chose a casino he was on bad terms with to prove a point.


Yes, and all the African Americans could have went to the plenty of Blanks Only restaurants too! Why on EARTH would they insist on being treated fairly/equally?!?!

Quote: Gandler

You say the casino stole his money?


When he buys chips, plays, and goes to cash them out and they don't cash him out and keep the chips, yes. Yes they stole his money in doing that.

Quote: Gandler

What did the gaming commission day? Do they not have the power to foe the casino to give it back without a trial if the casino violated a rule?


I have no clue what their powers are in the face of pending litigation.
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 1593
January 13th, 2015 at 12:21:46 PM permalink
Quote: Romes

While the reasons are different are both not a situation in which someone's rights are being violated?


Yes, and all the African Americans could have went to the plenty of Blanks Only restaurants too! Why on EARTH would they insist on being treated fairly/equally?!?!


When he buys chips, plays, and goes to cash them out and they don't cash him out and keep the chips, yes. Yes they stole his money in doing that.


I have no clue what their powers are in the face of pending litigation.



AP players are not a protected class. Nor should they be.

AP players engage in behavior that makes them liable to be banned. In no way is it the same as ethnicity.


This could have been resolved by the gaming commission if this was about the "stolen" chips. He wanted a lawsuit.

  • Jump to: