darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
Thanked by
onenickelmiracleMission146CrystalMathunJonsmoothgrh
May 2nd, 2021 at 7:20:07 AM permalink
So, as some of you may recall I was backroomed for using multiple Player cards at Resorts World back in 2014.

The lawsuit finally went before a civil jury in December 2019. There is no such thing as a slam dunk case as any attorney will tell you. You can say I am sugarcoating it but that is truth. As you can tell I did not prevail.

Here is my telling of what happened.

In January 2014, I was observed gambling on other people's cards. Let me stress "GAMBLING". NOT TAKING OFFERS.

In fact I was gambling at E-Craps. And yes, I intended to take freeplay off those cards but it's important to note I was surrounded by security just for playing on the cards and utilizing my own cash.

They asked for my ID and I willingly handed it over as I knew my face was flagged anyway. I asked to leave and eight guards surrounded me and said that was not an option. I had to come with them. I stood my ground for nearly half an hour but they threatened to charge me with theft. Avoiding false arrest is a form of coercion. They told me to follow them and I did... until...

The elevator to the back room was on the left and the escalator to exit the building was on the right. As we approached the juncture I made a beeline for the escalator and exit. Security rushed me, surrounded me and prevented my egress. These actions should leave no doubt that I was falsely imprisoned. (THIS THREE MINUTES OF WALKING AND MY ATTEMPTED ESCAPE FOOTAGE WAS LOST ACCORDING TO THE CASINO. HOW CONVENIENT!)

Once again, under threat, I was escorted to the back room. There I was ordered to empty all pockets. I refused.

The head of security who I knew also happened to be a former NYC police detective stated he was going to call in the local precinct and have me arrested for theft if I didn't empty my pockets. Perhaps I should have called his bluff but guess who NYPD will listen to, me or a former NYPD detective running Casino security?

Emptying my pockets still wasn't enough. The detective said he was going to run my ID through the NYPD system to check for warrants. On the video he states he has the power to do that. At deposition he stated that was ridiculous, of course he couldn't as that would be illegal. Nonetheless I was held further waiting for what most certainly was an attempt to have me arrested at all costs.

The entire ordeal was captured on surveillance tapes which ran nearly two hours. Some of that surveillance was their following me prior to the incident but I was held for about an hour all things inclusive (the showdown on the gaming floor, attempted escape, backroom, etc)

THE TRIAL

It pretty much was a small simple trial. I testified, head of security testified, footage was shown, jury came back. Here are my thoughts on why I most likely didn't prevail.

1) Resorts World is the only Casino in NYC.

This may be the biggest factor. Every prospective juror was asked by the defense if they were regular gamblers. If they said yes they were asked if they gambled at Resorts World. If they replied yes they were dismissed as Resorts World was the defendant.

Civil court is located fifteen driving minutes from Resorts World and all the prospective jurors live near by. Anyone who gambled regularly of course goes to the only Casino in town

The result was a full jury with not one experienced gambler, not one person who understood before the trial how promotional cards worked and most likely people who don't gamble do so because they don't believe in gambling. They claimed at selection not to have a bias against it but come on.

2) The judge.

The judge was at best misinformed. At worst biased. You can decide.

At one point early in the first day the judge sent the jury out and said he didn't understand why this case ever made it to court. While he didn't gamble in Casinos, he played poker occasionally and everyone knows if you use someone else's playing cards that's cheating.

It was actually the defense who quickly explained (and not too well because later comments from the judge made it clear to me he was still lost) about how promotional cards work. I'm pretty certain the defense rushed to clarify in order to avoid a possible excuse for an appeal.

I had hired the Wizard himself to testify as an expert witness to the mathematical aspects, how the return on the games was not affected and the propensity of players cards used in the market for promo advantage play.

Mr. Shackleford was flown into NY for a week at my expense as we could not guarantee the day he would be called to testify. (The Wizard has viewed the surveillance footage and can discuss what he saw if he wishes).

Defense argued this was a trial about false detainment and not gambling per se and the judge upheld that resulting in Michael's testimony being blocked. He ended up having a nice vacation and I thank him for making the trip.

The Defense called one of their employees to talk about the promotional aspect of the cards AND THEN HE PROCEEDED TO DISCUSS THE MATHEMATICAL ASPECTS OF GAMBLING AND THE PROMOTIONAL REWARDS EXACTLY WHICH THE WIZARDS TESTIMONY WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT except of course he testified in the Casinos favor and discussed how it hurt the Casinos bottom line.

My attorney lodged an objection that the witness was not testifying to false imprisonment but to aspects of gambling AND WAS OVERRULED! The judge said this was involving players cards in a casino so it was relevant to the decisions the Casino made.

Huh!?

3) TAINTED JURY

Very early on the first day of trial, my attorney was describing how players cards worked and how I was caught using multiple cards. My use of the cards was never a matter of contention.

A sudden and shocking outburst by one of the jurors who looked me dead in the eye, as she said "so you was doing wrong. Why would you do that?"

What the hell? She was immediately dismissed from the case. The jury was instructed to ignore any comments she had made. In my opinion a new jury should have been selected but time is of the essence in courts. The judge had a docket schedule and the trial continued


4)DEFENSE TRICKS

The Defense did all types of underhanded tricks. I won't go into them all. Here is one example.

A meeting was held without the jury to determine if they should be shown nearly two hours of footage. Everyone agreed it was not a good idea. Much of the footage was silent surveillance. Even in the detainment room there were long passages of silence as paperwork was prepped and I just sat saying nothing.

As the trial was underway there was no time to hire an editorial crew but it was noted I had experience in the editorial field (my Hollywood career does include editorial experience)

It was agreed I would create a cutdown of the footage and if all parties signed off that it was a fair representation (not attempting to color the footage in my favor) then it would be shown to the jury.

All this was done and on record the Defense agreed the footage was complete as to relevance. They would not have allowed it to be shown to the jury otherwise.

At my cross examination, Defense said "Yes or no, did you yourself edit this footage, keeping in what you felt was relevant?"

I attempted to explain but you have seen enough court shows. I was held to a yes or no answer. My attorney tried to Walk it back but the damage was done with the jury which already was tainted as described above.

CONCLUSION

In the end the jury believed what the Defense claimed, that the casino didn't know if the cards were stolen and were within their rights to detain me. (Never mind that surveillance already knew the cards in question from their following me around and could have ascertained whether they were stolen or not stolen by contacting the player's in question, something that more experienced Casinos like in Atlantic City do.)

Anyway, one has to know there is the possibility of losing any case when going forward. My attorney got the worst of it I suppose as she was working for expenses only so it was pretty much a five year donation on her part.

Perhaps it's sour grapes on my part but I did cost the Casino for their lawyers who I know didn't work for free.

And I single handedly changed the methods of Resorts World Casino. Today, you won't be falsely imprisoned for using other players cards in Resorts World. Trust me I know. I hit them hard with my teams for years while the lawsuit proceeded and the two instances where one of my people was surrounded by security and asked to leave, security just walked them to the door while a supervisor kept ordering them not detain them because they feared it could result in a law suit.

Yes, still the most feared AP on the East Coast!
Last edited by: darkoz on May 2, 2021
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
sabre
sabre
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 1172
Joined: Aug 16, 2010
Thanked by
Mission146
May 2nd, 2021 at 9:28:05 AM permalink
Great read. Thanks for posting this.

So your experience seems to be contrary to the general sentiment that a backrooming is an auto high 5 to 6 figure settlement.

Do you feel that

1) This sentiment is wrong?
2) The fact that you were going against a casino in a newer market killed you? (you allude to this in your description of the jury selection)
3) The fact that you had cards belonging to other people, instead of say card counting or hole carding was the issue? (I can see your average non gambling juror deciding "zomg identity theft guilty" in the first 5 minutes of the trial)
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
Thanked by
Mission146
May 2nd, 2021 at 9:41:58 AM permalink
Quote: sabre

Great read. Thanks for posting this.

So your experience seems to be contrary to the general sentiment that a backrooming is an auto high 5 to 6 figure settlement.

Do you feel that

1) This sentiment is wrong?
2) The fact that you were going against a casino in a newer market killed you? (you allude to this in your description of the jury selection)
3) The fact that you had cards belonging to other people, instead of say card counting or hole carding was the issue? (I can see your average non gambling juror deciding "zomg identity theft guilty" in the first 5 minutes of the trial)



1) Even Bob Nersessian will state to prospective clients that the sentiment is wrong. The high figure settlements get lots of publicity but don't expect them. Smaller settlements are more in line with expectations although it depends on circumstances.

And yes, I had some early dealings with Nersessian so I heard it from his own mouth

2) Yes, new markets as you can see cause problems. It's also difficult to find a lawyer who specializes in gambling related issues like a Nersessian.

3) Totally agree. I feel this case in Las Vegas would have been a winner. Finding a jury who DIDN'T know aspects of gambling would have been difficult. It's the opposite in newer markets especially where only one Casino exists or where they may be few and far between such as Pennsylvania
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26619
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
May 2nd, 2021 at 6:54:17 PM permalink
I'm glad to see the story finally published.

It's sad that anybody can detain somebody against their will who committed no crime and not be held accountable. I can't speak to the details of the case because not only was I not allowed to be heard, but I couldn't even sit in the courtroom and watch. Furthermore (darkoz, correct me if I'm wrong), but the judge previously allowed me to be listed as a witness before I flew out. It seems to me almost every decision the judge made cut the defense's way.

On a humorous note, on the first day of the trial, I took darkoz to task for not wearing a tie. He came back with, "I don't own one and haven't worn one since high school."
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 2nd, 2021 at 7:29:41 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I'm glad to see the story finally published.

It's sad that anybody can detain somebody against their will who committed no crime and not be held accountable. I can't speak to the details of the case because not only was I not allowed to be heard, but I couldn't even sit in the courtroom and watch. Furthermore (darkoz, correct me if I'm wrong), but the judge previously allowed me to be listed as a witness before I flew out. It seems to me almost every decision the judge made cut the defense's way.

On a humorous note, on the first day of the trial, I took darkoz to task for not wearing a tie. He came back with, "I don't own one and haven't worn one since high school."



I'm glad you are of the opinion about the judge as well.

Yes, once he had it in his mind that I was getting over he made very lopsided decisions

I hate making accusations of bias because they seem paranoid but when someone else independently corroborates it's difficult to ignore.

As to wearing ties, from film-making to gambling AP I pick livelihoods I am not required to wear a tie. Can't stand them.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22291
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
May 2nd, 2021 at 7:38:40 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz

1) Even Bob Nersessian will state to prospective clients that the sentiment is wrong. The high figure settlements get lots of publicity but don't expect them. Smaller settlements are more in line with expectations although it depends on circumstances.

And yes, I had some early dealings with Nersessian so I heard it from his own mouth

2) Yes, new markets as you can see cause problems. It's also difficult to find a lawyer who specializes in gambling related issues like a Nersessian.

3) Totally agree. I feel this case in Las Vegas would have been a winner. Finding a jury who DIDN'T know aspects of gambling would have been difficult. It's the opposite in newer markets especially where only one Casino exists or where they may be few and far between such as Pennsylvania

IIRC Bob said he doesn't want anything to do these types of cases because they DO have reasonable suspicion of a crime to detain you.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22291
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
May 2nd, 2021 at 7:54:12 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

What were you going to testify as an expert witness about, I don't see the connection?
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
randomperson
randomperson
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 198
Joined: Dec 21, 2012
May 2nd, 2021 at 7:57:07 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

IIRC Bob said he doesn't want anything to do these types of cases because they DO have reasonable suspicion of a crime to detain you.



I had a similar experience as darkoz in a different casino around the same time, and that was one of the reasons that I never pursued legal remedy. The other more important one was that I still had a pipeline to protect.

Mine might have been a little worse because they grabbed my arms behind my back and dragged me through the casino to the back room.
randomperson
randomperson
  • Threads: 3
  • Posts: 198
Joined: Dec 21, 2012
May 2nd, 2021 at 7:59:23 PM permalink
In my experience, calling the police is an empty threat because they have to notify the police anyway in many jurisdictions.
Tanko
Tanko
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1200
Joined: Apr 22, 2013
May 3rd, 2021 at 6:18:42 AM permalink
Sometimes it speeds things up considerably and saves costs, when your lawyer has pull.

Years ago, I was involved in Civil lawsuit in Queens. We were headed for an eventual trial, when my lawyer called me and said “The Judge has set aside an entire day for all parties to meet in his chambers to settle the case”.

I went first into the Judge’s chambers with my lawyer, to present my case. The Plaintiff and his attorney followed.

We were waiting outside the Judge’s chambers, when the Plaintiff’s attorney came out and bragged to his client, intentionally loud enough for us to hear, "I have friends who sit on the Appellate bench. I can get them to overturn this Judge’s decision".

A minute later, the Judge calls my attorney and me into his chambers and announces “We have a deal”.

I told him "No we don’t. That attorney just said he can get his friends on the Appellate to overturn your decision".

My attorney confirmed that she also heard this.

“He can’t do that”.

“Maybe not, but this is the second time he said it. He said the same thing about the previous Judge too.”

My attorney confirmed this as well.

Judges become livid when anyone challenges their authority, and I just lit the fuse.

“Go out and tell him to come back in here”.

A few minutes later, the Judge called my attorney and me back into his chambers. The formerly loudmouth attorney was now slouching his chair with his hands clasped together on his knees, looking very concerned.

I won the case.

When I next met with my lawyer, I commented that it was very generous of the Judge to set aside an entire day for us to settle the case. She responded, “Yes it was. He set aside other cases to hear yours. My partner is on the Advisory Committee that selects Judges. That Judge got his appointment because of my partner”.

That is not why I won the case, but it ended the case very early and saved me thousands in legal fees.

This is how stupid that Plaintiff’s lawyer was.

While his client was suing me, the lawyer held the money he owed me in escrow, pending the outcome of the case. Despite a Judge telling him he had no right to hold the money, he defied the Judge and said he would continue to hold the money anyway. The Judge warned him, that I could foreclose on his client. He shrugged it off.

I served his client with a notice of foreclosure and strangely never got a response. A Judge had issued an order to stop the foreclosure, but I was never notified.

After I foreclosed on his client, the attorney went back to the Judge to overturn the foreclosure. The Judge refused. “But you ordered a ‘Stop’. “Yes I did, but you never served it on him. You were supposed to serve him.”

The Plaintiff ended up suing his lawyer for malpractice.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
  • Threads: 207
  • Posts: 11006
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 6:27:57 AM permalink
Interesting read.

Sorry it didn’t go your way.

Quote:

At my cross examination, Defense said "Yes or no, did you yourself edit this footage, keeping in what you felt was relevant?"

I doubt it would have changed much, but the correct answer is “no”. I assume you said “yes”.

Yeah, you edited it, but you didn’t keep what you felt was relevant. You kept what the defense agreed was relevant.

That’s a BIG difference.

In life, it’s typical to give answers before fully thinking about the question, or the ramifications of the answer. In court, taking a moment to consider the question, and give the answer that’s both truthful and that they weren’t expecting, can be vital.

Then add an explanation: “During the editing process, both teams agreed as to what should be left in and what could be eliminated.” No mention of who did the editing, but a better answer and still truthful.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ ————————————————————————————————————— Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
zippyboy
zippyboy
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 1124
Joined: Jan 19, 2011
May 3rd, 2021 at 7:46:15 AM permalink
What I don't understand is why you are using multiple other players cards anyway? Are you trying to gain reward points for friends of yours? And just got caught? Why would the casino think you're playing with stolen cards? What benefit would that be to you? Must you play with a card at all? Just play with cash.
"Poker sure is an easy game to beat if you have the roll to keep rebuying."
Indy70
Indy70
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 26
Joined: Jul 30, 2015
May 3rd, 2021 at 7:53:17 AM permalink
darkoz,

I appreciate you trying to slay the dragon. I hope that when others read your account of how the trial went, and if they decide to move forward in court as you did. They do it differently.

1) IMO your lawyer failed you from start to finish.
How did she let the defense dictate everything from Jury selection, to witness testimony, evidence presented, cross examinations,
etc.

2) Timing of the trial. You may not have had a say in this, but if anyone expects a citizen jury to pay attention between Thanksgiving
and the New Year. Might as well try to push rope a waterfall.

3) As axel said Why was Mike there? the last thing you want to do is muddy the water, sounds like you were going to try to beat the
defense to their tactic? And then you couldn't at least use Mike as a rebuttal?

4) Editing of the surveillance footage, its incomprehensible that your side came to a consensus that this was a good idea. Of course
the defense agreed, it was their AP move of the trial.

Just my two cents.
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 7:57:47 AM permalink
Quote: zippyboy

What I don't understand is why you are using multiple other players cards anyway? Are you trying to gain reward points for friends of yours? And just got caught? Why would the casino think you're playing with stolen cards? What benefit would that be to you? Must you play with a card at all? Just play with cash.



It's an advantage play that few people understand how to use even though there are plenty of people who do it.

A husband may use his wife's card because she has an offer and doesn't feel like going to pick it up herself.

Just extend that to other people.

In my case it's way more complicated than that. In fact the expert for the Defense explained what I was doing with multiple cards and was 100% wrong! But of course I couldn't jump up and scream he didn't know what he was talking about.

His conclusion was I did a low-level advantage play. Uggghh, if only he knew what I was really doing it would have blown his mind.

And he was their expert, lol.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26619
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 9:03:26 AM permalink
Quote: Indy70

3) As axel said Why was Mike there? the last thing you want to do is muddy the water, sounds like you were going to try to beat the
defense to their tactic? And then you couldn't at least use Mike as a rebuttal?



I was there to held explain to the jury gaming terminology in layman's terms. What player cards were for, how points worked, simple stuff like that. To be honest, I had a difference in opinion with darkoz's attorney on strategy. I thought she should press aggressively that it was a false detainment case and keep the focus off darkoz. Instead, she had a more defensive strategy that showed darkoz was abiding not just by the law but didn't break any casino rules. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there wasn't a rule at the time forbidding using other player cards, although one was added because of this.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 10:30:11 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I was there to held explain to the jury gaming terminology in layman's terms. What player cards were for, how points worked, simple stuff like that. To be honest, I had a difference in opinion with darkoz's attorney on strategy. I thought she should press aggressively that it was a false detainment case and keep the focus off darkoz. Instead, she had a more defensive strategy that showed darkoz was abiding not just by the law but didn't break any casino rules. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there wasn't a rule at the time forbidding using other player cards, although one was added because of this.



That is correct.

In fact quite a few people would walk up to the gift desk and hand multiple gift vouchers in other people's names. I saw one guy walk of with six different $50 gas cards. I knew eventually the Casino would get tired of that.

Sure enough Resorts World didn't care if you used another person's card... Until suddenly they did.

My attorney wanted to stress that but I agree with the Wizard it should have been handled differently.

I don't like to bad-mouth my attorney. She worked for five years for no pay. Whatever decisions she made she believed were best.

And all court cases have a winner and a loser. Too easy to lay blame on your attorneys. Not every case lost (and that's every case in the world which has a losing side) was because of the attorneys.

I was told it was a difficult case jurisdictionally from the get go.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26619
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 11:18:27 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

I don't like to bad-mouth my attorney. She worked for five years for no pay. Whatever decisions she made she believed were best.



She was super nice and worked very hard on your case. I got along with her very well. I'd be proud to be friends with her if I lived in NYC, assuming I didn't drive her crazy (in a bad way), as I do with most women.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
MDawg
MDawg
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 7529
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
May 3rd, 2021 at 11:44:34 AM permalink
I understand that the civil lawsuit was for false imprisonment?

I liken this to a shoplifting case where the charges are dropped. What I would need to see, is the statute under which DarkOz was detained in the first place. In many jurisdictions, merchants are allowed to detain someone for allegedly shoplifting if they have reasonable grounds (probable cause) to believe that shoplifting occurred. In other words, if the detention is viewed as reasonable under the circumstances, even if it turns out that no theft occurred, the merchant defeats a civil action for false imprisonment. But this is written into the statute that authorizes the shoplifting detention in the first place, which is why I would need to see the statute(s) under which DarkOz was detained.
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 12:30:42 PM permalink
Quote: MDawg

I understand that the civil lawsuit was for false imprisonment?

I liken this to a shoplifting case where the charges are dropped. What I would need to see, is the statute under which DarkOz was detained in the first place. In many jurisdictions, merchants are allowed to detain someone for allegedly shoplifting if they have reasonable grounds (probable cause) to believe that shoplifting occurred. In other words, if the detention is viewed as reasonable under the circumstances, even if it turns out that no theft occurred, the merchant defeats a civil action for false imprisonment. But this is written into the statute that authorizes the shoplifting detention in the first place, which is why I would need to see the statute(s) under which DarkOz was detained.



That's correct, this would fall under similar situations however you stressed where charges were dropped in a shoplifting case.

In my case no police were even called in, no charges were ever even filed.

Citizens arrest and shoplifting laws give citizens the opportunity to hold someone so that police authority can arrive in a timely fashion to take over. NOT carte blanche to hold and search someone's belongings.

Let me FURTHER STRESS, the Casino FOUND the cards of other players in my possession. If this had been a shoplifting case it would have been equivalent to finding stolen clothes with tags on them in my bag. The Casino did NOT call the police EVEN AFTER finding the cards. And no charges were ever filed.

Obviously the Casino knew all along using the cards was not illegal unless you believe Casinos locate criminals with the goods red-handed and then just release them with no consequences

The Casino simply felt they had the right to detain me for over and hour, and search through all my belongings. A citizens arrest with no arrest.

Citizens don't get to imprison and search through your belongings (hell, even the authorities need a search warrant).

Resorts World doesn't do that anymore after I sued them. Proof they know they were in the wrong.

EDIT: For the record, at the trial the Defense stipulated to the jury that my use of other players cards violated no laws.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
MDawg
MDawg
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 7529
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
May 3rd, 2021 at 2:34:51 PM permalink
This is sounding even more then like a lawsuit filed for wrongful detention along the lines of someone accused of shoplifting.

First off, the fact that charges were filed or not filed is not dispositive of whether there were reasonable grounds for the detention. Of course, no charges filed does cut in your favor, but doesn't settle the issue of reasonableness entirely.

And then - this further issue of being searched by the private actors (the casinos). That makes this even more akin to a wrongfully accused shoplifter lawsuit.
YES, there is a statute on the books in some states that disallows private security from searching the suspect's (shoplifter's) clothing (but does allow the security guard for example to search the accused's purse, bags, backpack, etc.) (But there are exceptions in some states, for example librarians and the actual store owners are in some states some circumstances allowed to search the clothing of the suspect.) But again, this all comes down to exactly WHAT statute(s) is/are involved and what powers given (and not given) by statute(s) to the private actor(s) who detain/s the suspect.

So again, to analyze this meaningfully I'd need the
(1) exact statute(s) under which you were detained,
(2) exact statutes under which you filed your suit (or, if no statute, an indication of whatever you filed the action under, for example under say common law false imprisonment).
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
MDawg
MDawg
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 7529
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
May 3rd, 2021 at 2:46:03 PM permalink
Keep in mind one thing further. At the end of the day, even if you were trying to establish that your person was searched wrongfully, the judge (or jury) might just in the end try to define your case as pivoting only on whether or not it was reasonable to detain you. Remember you are dealing with a trial court level judge - not necessarily an expert in the nuances of the law, and maybe resigned to letting a higher authority settle something as fine tuned as whether the private actor had the right to search your person, or whether you are entitled to damages even if you were searched contrary to statute.
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 3:29:19 PM permalink
Quote: MDawg

Keep in mind one thing further. At the end of the day, even if you were trying to establish that your person was searched wrongfully, the judge (or jury) might just in the end try to define your case as pivoting only on whether or not it was reasonable to detain you. Remember you are dealing with a trial court level judge - not necessarily an expert in the nuances of the law, and maybe resigned to letting a higher authority settle something as fine tuned as whether the private actor had the right to search your person, or whether you are entitled to damages even if you were searched contrary to statute.



Once again, the Defense attorney stipulated to the court at the beginning of trial that no crime was committed!

I'm certain he wanted to remove any questions as to why the police were not called ever for the incident.

MDawg, there is no statute I can think of that gives a shopkeeper the right to search patrons who they admit were never breaking the law.

The problem with your shoplifting example is that shoplifting is a crime.

Using other people players cards is not

Any shoplifting storekeeper statutes will give storekeepers an opportunity to decide IF a crime was committed.

None will give storekeepers the right to detain people for actions known to be legal
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
DRich
DRich
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 11882
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
Thanked by
AxelWolf
May 3rd, 2021 at 3:56:01 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz

Once again, the Defense attorney stipulated to the court at the beginning of trial that no crime was committed!

I'm certain he wanted to remove any questions as to why the police were not called ever for the incident.

MDawg, there is no statute I can think of that gives a shopkeeper the right to search patrons who they admit were never breaking the law.

The problem with your shoplifting example is that shoplifting is a crime.

Using other people players cards is not

Any shoplifting storekeeper statutes will give storekeepers an opportunity to decide IF a crime was committed.

None will give storekeepers the right to detain people for actions known to be legal



I believe they may be able to detain you on the suspicion that a crime was committed as long as they release you when they have determined a crime was not committed.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
unJon
unJon
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 4654
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
May 3rd, 2021 at 4:15:45 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz

Once again, the Defense attorney stipulated to the court at the beginning of trial that no crime was committed!

I'm certain he wanted to remove any questions as to why the police were not called ever for the incident.

MDawg, there is no statute I can think of that gives a shopkeeper the right to search patrons who they admit were never breaking the law.

The problem with your shoplifting example is that shoplifting is a crime.

Using other people players cards is not

Any shoplifting storekeeper statutes will give storekeepers an opportunity to decide IF a crime was committed.

None will give storekeepers the right to detain people for actions known to be legal



Basically agree with DRich and MDawg. Stipulating that a crime was not committed is not the same as having a reasonable suspicion at the time that a crime was committed.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
unJon
unJon
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 4654
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
May 3rd, 2021 at 4:17:10 PM permalink
Helpful if you answer MDawg question if you know:

1) Under what statute or common law theory did you sue the casino?

2) Did casino point to a statute or common law principle that stood for the proposition that it was ok they detained you?
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 4:23:36 PM permalink
Quote: DRich

I believe they may be able to detain you on the suspicion that a crime was committed as long as they release you when they have determined a crime was not committed.



Perhaps if they actually determined a crime was not committed!!!

They never contacted any of the players who's cards I had. After all, they were my people and they kept me notified. The Casino never reached out to them.

Therefore there was no investigation to determine if I was using the cards with or without permission.

The Casino simply didn't care. Their intent was not to determine if a crime was being committed but to detain people using Freeplay off other cards regardless.

I should point out at that time people were being backroomed for using other players cards approximately two times a day. Because the Casino had allowed it and then changed their minds the use of other players cards was rampant.

They had daily Freeplay for points earned specials where you got $10 Freeplay for earning ten points and quite a few people were "card-flipping" which was a term most people in the Casino coined for switching cards after earning ten points repeatedly.

First it was okay, then came the crackdown.

My point is none of those backroomed ever had the police called. Many card-flippers I didn't know but the ones I did told me.

So the Casino didn't really believe any crimes were being committed.

I was just the first person to launch a lawsuit

EDIT:. Shopkeeper privelige for investigation is usually limited to fifteen minutes. Detainment for an hour is not allowed in any jurisdictions I am aware of.

At any rate the case is over. I personally have moved on
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
onenickelmiracle
onenickelmiracle
  • Threads: 212
  • Posts: 8277
Joined: Jan 26, 2012
May 3rd, 2021 at 8:03:22 PM permalink
Did the casino offer any tempting settlement before the trial at any point?
I am a robot.
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
Thanked by
onenickelmiracle
May 3rd, 2021 at 8:14:54 PM permalink
Quote: onenickelmiracle

Did the casino offer any tempting settlement before the trial at any point?



No, they never offered.

They were quite defiant and wanted to go to court.

I suspect the idea of giving me even more money after all I took them for was just too sickening.

I suspect they paid their lawyers over the years more than they would have paid me in settlement.

On the other hand their attorneys may just be a firm on payroll.

Or some combination therof
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26619
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 9:21:50 PM permalink
Quote: unJon

2) Did casino point to a statute or common law principle that stood for the proposition that it was ok they detained you?



I watched the video of the back rooming. The security goons said he was "stealing points."

Quote: darkoz

No, they never offered.



Before the judge entered the court there was a court official, whose title I don't know, who called both parties one at a time to some room behind the back door of the courtroom. I think the purpose of this was to try to negotiate a last-minute settlement. When everyone was in the courtroom, waiting for the judge to appear, this same man called both attorneys up front. I couldn't hear what was being said, but I could hear the casino's attorney say something like, "I think my client would agree to that."

Then darkoz's attorney came back. I was sitting next to her. I asked her what that was about. She said this court official said something like, "This is at best a $25,000 matter." I don't recall the exact number, but it was about that. Darkoz's attorney said something to the effect that it was an insulting offer. I told her she was absolutely right. It's easy to say in retrospect $25,000 is more than $0, but at the time I was of the understanding that similar cases in Nevada end up in mid-six-figure judgements.

So, yes, the casino's attorney never offered as far as I know. However, I think they would have agreed to the 25k.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 9:46:37 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I watched the video of the back rooming. The security goons said he was "stealing points."



Before the judge entered the court there was a court official, whose title I don't know, who called both parties one at a time to some room behind the back door of the courtroom. I think the purpose of this was to try to negotiate a last-minute settlement. When everyone was in the courtroom, waiting for the judge to appear, this same man called both attorneys up front. I couldn't hear what was being said, but I could hear the casino's attorney say something like, "I think my client would agree to that."

Then darkoz's attorney came back. I was sitting next to her. I asked her what that was about. She said this court official said something like, "This is at best a $25,000 matter." I don't recall the exact number, but it was about that. Darkoz's attorney said something to the effect that it was an insulting offer. I told her she was absolutely right. It's easy to say in retrospect $25,000 is more than $0, but at the time I was of the understanding that similar cases in Nevada end up in mid-six-figure judgements.

So, yes, the casino's attorney never offered as far as I know. However, I think they would have agreed to the 25k.



Yes it was some last minute court suggestion. Of course the Casino would have been happy with $25,000.

Without going to trial my attorney would have received a smaller portion. Five years of her labor added up to more than just accepting under ten grand or so.

She felt the rewards outweighed the risk
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 16282
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 10:06:48 PM permalink
His attorney worked on the case for years, I imagine on a 30-40% of settlement basis. I think she'd rather roll the dice and shoot for a big payday instead of accepting $8-10,000 for her efforts.
Queens County Civil Courts are notorious and have been for generations. The judges are almost all party hacks and were incredibly mediocre lawyers. Since the city closed its OTBs, those patronage jobs have gone into the court system.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 16282
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
May 3rd, 2021 at 10:07:32 PM permalink
Deleted double post
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22291
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
May 4th, 2021 at 1:08:43 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I watched the video of the back rooming. The security goons said he was "stealing points."



And I assume that would be illegal in that jurisdiction? If so, it seems that they assumed they had a good reason to detain him.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22291
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
May 4th, 2021 at 1:17:50 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

It's easy to say in retrospect $25,000 is more than $0, but at the time I was of the understanding that similar cases in Nevada end up in mid-six-figure judgements.
.

Have any of those cases ever been when someone had been reasonably suspected of committing a crime?


From what I can recall, all the times where big money has been awarded have been when there was no reasonable suspicion of a crime.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 4th, 2021 at 4:27:50 AM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

And I assume that would be illegal in that jurisdiction? If so, it seems that they assumed they had a good reason to detain him.



I don't believe you understand what the security guards meant when they said I was "stealing points"

I was caught gambling on the cards at E-Craps. Surveillance observed me putting my own money into the machines (It's right there on the tape they supplied)

In the backroom I was told I was stealing. i asked how I could be stealing when I was using my own cash and the security guard said I was stealing points by earning them on someone else's card.

The full quote rambled a bit but to paraphrase the most relevant part:

"It's your money, your card that's fine, it's your money, someone else's card, that's stealing. You are stealing points. Those points can be used for free food, for free gifts for a free buffet. But it's not free! Nothing is free in this world. Someone has to pay for it. You using someone else's card that's stealing and we don't allow that "

It's pretty hilarious when he says in the same breath someone has to pay for all the free food and me using my own money to do that is stealing.

It is perhaps indicative of how difficult this case was that even Axel heard the security guard mentioned stealing and thinks what I did was illegal. Imagine a non-gambling jury
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26619
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
May 4th, 2021 at 6:03:10 AM permalink
I think it was darkoz who made the following comparison at the time, so I give him proper credit. Let's say a grocery store puts out a coupon in a free paper for buy one loaf of bread, get one free. It does say limit one per customer. So darkoz gets a dozen of these papers, cuts out the coupon from each paper, and uses one per day. Eventually the store catches on that he is abusing the coupon offer. Do they have the right to backroom him for over an hour, make him empty his pockets, and photograph him against his will?

It would be a sad commentary if a jury didn't hold the store accountable if they did.

p.s. Happy Star Wars day!
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 4th, 2021 at 6:36:45 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I think it was darkoz who made the following comparison at the time, so I give him proper credit. Let's say a grocery store puts out a coupon in a free paper for buy one loaf of bread, get one free. It does say limit one per customer. So darkoz gets a dozen of these papers, cuts out the coupon from each paper, and uses one per day. Eventually the store catches on that he is abusing the coupon offer. Do they have the right to backroom him for over an hour, make him empty his pockets, and photograph him against his will?

It would be a sad commentary if a jury didn't hold the store accountable if they did.

p.s. Happy Star Wars day!



Thanks, Wizard.

To complete the analogy the coupon said limited to one per customer using your ShopRite card for example.

So showing up with your ShopRite card you buy one, get one free using the coupon from the paper.

Since it was limited to one per customer you return with your neighbors ShopRite card who willingly gave it to you and you get another buy one, get one free item.

And then ShopRite backroomed you, claims it's your money but someone else's ShopRite card so you stole the buy one get one free item
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
DRich
DRich
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 11882
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
May 4th, 2021 at 6:48:28 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

It's easy to say in retrospect $25,000 is more than $0, but at the time I was of the understanding that similar cases in Nevada end up in mid-six-figure judgements.

So, yes, the casino's attorney never offered as far as I know. However, I think they would have agreed to the 25k.



I can't imagine a six figure judgement with any physical assault.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO 
  • Threads: 122
  • Posts: 11083
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
May 4th, 2021 at 7:19:03 AM permalink
Perhaps the main reason DarkOz lost was that he was not a sympathetic character to the jury. No matter the technical legality of the using dozens of other people’s cards, most everyone will feel that it is plain wrong to do so. People have an internal code of ethics, and most all would realize that DarkOz was trying to take advantage of an offer that in no way the casino MEANT to make available to him.

The jury must have felt that it was reasonable to assume that a crime was being committed, and even though that was found out to not be true, it was reasonable to think the cards were stolen. The fact that he was held for just an hour or two, and was not harmed, shows how minor this event was. I’ll bet the jurors have been ‘held’ longer in a traffic jam on the LIE (Long Island Expressway).

I do admire DarkOz’s ‘balls’ in bringing this lawsuit. Not his brains. And frankly, it seems like your lawyer was incompetent. As has been mentioned by other posters....

How many days/hours did you put into this endeavor? How much money (Wiz for a week has to be $$,$$$$). How many lost days of ‘work’ for you?

In summary..... from what you have shared, you had a weak case with a bad lawyer. But I still think you can be proud you had an idea and did all you could to make it come to fruition. Next time at least insult the casino security guy’s mother so he at least assaults you, so you will have a better case.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22291
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
May 4th, 2021 at 7:34:06 AM permalink
Quote: darkoz

I don't believe you understand what the security guards meant when they said I was "stealing points"

I was caught gambling on the cards at E-Craps. Surveillance observed me putting my own money into the machines (It's right there on the tape they supplied)

In the backroom I was told I was stealing. i asked how I could be stealing when I was using my own cash and the security guard said I was stealing points by earning them on someone else's card.

The full quote rambled a bit but to paraphrase the most relevant part:

"It's your money, your card that's fine, it's your money, someone else's card, that's stealing. You are stealing points. Those points can be used for free food, for free gifts for a free buffet. But it's not free! Nothing is free in this world. Someone has to pay for it. You using someone else's card that's stealing and we don't allow that "

It's pretty hilarious when he says in the same breath someone has to pay for all the free food and me using my own money to do that is stealing.

It is perhaps indicative of how difficult this case was that even Axel heard the security guard mentioned stealing and thinks what I did was illegal. Imagine a non-gambling jury

HOLD ON NOW!!!! I did not think what you did was illegal, bad or anything like that, I also don't like the fact that they can detain someone without something more substantial.

I said, if they thought you were stealing or doing something illegal that seems to give them "the right" to detain you.

If I were on a Jury, I would want to know the law.
If the law is... they must believe they have witnessed a felony in order to detain someone for the purpose of calling the police(?) If they didn't suspect you of committing a felony, and since they didn't call the police, I would side with you.

Personally, since security guards are in a special position where their job makes it more likely they will have to detain, enforce or protect (many view it as a position of authority). I think security guards should be held to a higher standard, including their knowledge of the laws. The casinos should be held responsible when they fail in that area.
Last edited by: AxelWolf on May 4, 2021
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 4th, 2021 at 7:53:22 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

Perhaps the main reason DarkOz lost was that he was not a sympathetic character to the jury. No matter the technical legality of the using dozens of other people’s cards, most everyone will feel that it is plain wrong to do so. People have an internal code of ethics, and most all would realize that DarkOz was trying to take advantage of an offer that in no way the casino MEANT to make available to him.

The jury must have felt that it was reasonable to assume that a crime was being committed, and even though that was found out to not be true, it was reasonable to think the cards were stolen. The fact that he was held for just an hour or two, and was not harmed, shows how minor this event was. I’ll bet the jurors have been ‘held’ longer in a traffic jam on the LIE (Long Island Expressway).

I do admire DarkOz’s ‘balls’ in bringing this lawsuit. Not his brains. And frankly, it seems like your lawyer was incompetent. As has been mentioned by other posters....

How many days/hours did you put into this endeavor? How much money (Wiz for a week has to be $$,$$$$). How many lost days of ‘work’ for you?

In summary..... from what you have shared, you had a weak case with a bad lawyer. But I still think you can be proud you had an idea and did all you could to make it come to fruition. Next time at least insult the casino security guy’s mother so he at least assaults you, so you will have a better case.



I agree the sympathetic factor was a major influence.

I find gamblers admire Advantage Players for the most part because they too fantasize about winning and beating Casinos but as soon as I explain what I do to non-gambling people it's totally the opposite.

Non-gamblers seem to be brainwashed that the "Casino always wins" and anyone who figures out how to beat them is doing so unfairly (interestingly most don't understand the mechanism of short pay and Casino tactics to separate patrons from there money that no rightful person would consider fair).

I know at least two friends who claim what I do should be illegal even though they can't articulate why ("the card has someone else's name right?") Is usually the excuse.

As for my choice of attorney there was a good few months where I could not find an attorney who understood gambling inside of NYC. In fact there is a reason Bob Nersessian is such a well recognized specialist and it's because it's difficult to find an attorney who feels comfortable with gambling related lawsuits.

Finding an attorney willing to work for so many years predicated on getting paid only if she wins was even more difficult so whether she was competent or not I won't bad-mouth her.

I can't say I lost any work hours as I always have my employees cover for me anyway. And pursuing your rights, even if you don't prevail is not wasted hours IMHO.

I am currently contemplating a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction but that will cost some money and I haven't decided if I want to pursue it yet. The window is open in that situation whenever I wish to move forward
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
MDawg
MDawg
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 7529
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
May 4th, 2021 at 8:06:06 AM permalink
I did make a few detailed analysis posts in this thread, based on the law as best I am able to apply it here, however, without knowing under what exact statute he was detained, and under what statute or common law he presented the lawsuit, there is not much more to analyze legally speaking.

Over all, DarkOz doesn't know much about the law and is filling in gaps based on misinformation or imprecise analysis of both the situation and the law. For example, there is no law or principle that "15 minutes detention is okay" but "one hour is not." The law that applies here turns on whether the detention was reasonable under the circumstances (and again, knowing under what statute(s) he was detained would be helpful). However, DarkOz does have the foresight to understand that he will not be a sympathetic plaintiff in these situations, but not because of a bias in favor of that casinos always win, but because most jurors will view him as "getting over" on the casinos through some kind of ploy.

That lawsuit of his was never worth much, as mentioned by SooPoo, and I am surprised the attorney didn't just try to settle it for even $10,000. years earlier. (Maybe she wanted to do that, but DarkOz disagreed with any settlement.) I doubt the casino would have even offered the full $25,000. that the court suggested once they were already there and ready to go to trial. Just because the court opined that the case was not worth more than $25K doesn't mean that the casino was willing to pay $25K.
The casinos don't want to leave behind a precedent or trail of any kind of people getting away with suing them for anything successfully, and typically take things all the way to trial. Now, if they lose on appeal AFTER trial, or lose some kind of appellate evidentiary points related to trial, then yes they do settle, but otherwise, rarely do they cough up a penny unless they know they are completely in the wrong.

This was a loser lawsuit from the beginning, but I do understand the general principle of wanting to go forward with it, especially after finding an attorney willing to take it on contingency. I assume DarkOz had to cover all costs and expert witness fees out of pocket.
Last edited by: MDawg on May 4, 2021
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 4th, 2021 at 8:34:58 AM permalink
For those who claim this was a weak case I disagree.

For one thing this basis is made without having seen the surveillance footage. The Wizard saw the footage. Perhaps he can chime in but I recall he was surprised at what the Casino thought they were allowed to do.

The case was never about me not following the rules of the casino but what the Casino was allowed to do to stop my performing a basically legal AP maneuver.

Finally for those people that imagine we filed the lawsuit and then five years later just showed up in court that is nowhere near the whole story.

Over five years there were motions to dismiss from resorts world (five in all I believe) citing this reason and that and all motions to dismiss were denied

Motion to suppress the surveillance tapes also caused a fight for years and eventually resorts world lost that as well (although with the caveat that I could not show the surveillance footage or post on any website)

At least four different judges made decisions over the years and none said this case had no merits and threw out the suit so any armchair lawyers discussion of the merits is just that. Armchair discussion.

I suppose that's what this forum is for, armchair discussion but my point is the case had enough "merits" to wind it's way through a very complicated legal system.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22291
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
May 4th, 2021 at 9:02:31 AM permalink
Quote: MDawg


That lawsuit of his was never worth much, as mentioned by SooPoo, and I am surprised the attorney didn't just settle it for even $10,000. years earlier.

You don't know that, you are saying this after the fact. People have received significant amounts for back-rooming with much less intrusiveness and time spent being detained, even after a few attornies saying, "you got nothing". Had DO won 50k, I have a feeling you would have said he didn't get enough.

Years ago, I had a situation where I needed an attorney for something AP-related where they were trying to press charges. Some may know who Glen Learner is, a well-known personal injury lawyer in NV. He was a personal friend of my partner at the time, as to why we approached him and his law partner(this was pre, "in wreck get a check"/ The Heavy Hitter, and pre Bob Nersesian being known) After giving them the details, I specifically remember them saying, "We might be able to get the charges down to a year + fines". I was like, what the hell, they should be paying me money. Obviously, I found a different attorney, and all charges were dropped and they gave us money. Legally, I had no doubt that would be the case, but there's always a chance something could go wrong. People are oftentimes looking for back-room paydays, I'm looking to avoid getting back-roomed. If it's a simple backrooming, I'm more inclined to just let it go, as I have in the past. Making a big stick will ensure you can never go back to that casino or others they might become affiliated with.



I take it these types of cases are relatively new to that jurisdiction, he happened to lose, but at some point, someone will no doubt get a big payday, it could have been him. I know firsthand timing is everything. What's that saying... Pioneers often get little but arrows in their backs?
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
JohnnyQ
JohnnyQ
  • Threads: 264
  • Posts: 4032
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
Thanked by
Hunterhill
May 4th, 2021 at 9:03:49 AM permalink
I have seen situations where I believe a Casino has broken the state regulations in their promotional contests, yet I was able to get the gaming commission to do NOTHING about it.

This kind of verbiage is typical:

"( fill in the blank ) has the responsibility to ensure the integrity of casino gaming ...by licensing, regulating, investigating and enforcing state laws."

Fancy words, but all BS as far as I can see. I thought about getting an attorney, but didn't go any further than that.
There's emptiness behind their eyes There's dust in all their hearts They just want to steal us all and take us all apart
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22291
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
May 4th, 2021 at 9:07:15 AM permalink
Quote: JohnnyQ

I have seen situations where I believe a Casino has broken the state regulations in their promotional contests, yet I was able to get the gaming commission to do NOTHING about it.

This kind of verbiage is typical:

"( fill in the blank ) has the responsibility to ensure the integrity of casino gaming ...by licensing, regulating, investigating and enforcing state laws."

Fancy words, but all BS as far as I can see. I thought about getting an attorney, but didn't go any further than that.

Add this to the KENO EXPLOSION GAFFE? thread as well.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
darkoz
darkoz
  • Threads: 297
  • Posts: 11545
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
May 4th, 2021 at 9:20:44 AM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

You don't know that, you are saying this after the fact. People have received significant amounts for back-rooming with much less intrusiveness and time spent being detained, even after a few attornies saying, "you got nothing". Had DO won 50k, I have a feeling you would have said he didn't get enough.

Years ago, I had a situation where I needed an attorney for something AP-related where they were trying to press charges. Some may know who Glen Learner is, a well-known personal injury lawyer in NV. He was a personal friend of my partner at the time, as to why we approached him and his law partner(this was pre, "in wreck get a check"/ The Heavy Hitter, and pre Bob Nersesian being known) After giving them the details, I specifically remember them saying, "We might be able to get the charges down to a year + fines". I was like, what the hell, they should be paying me money. Obviously, I found a different attorney, and all charges were dropped and they gave us money. Legally, I had no doubt that would be the case, but there's always a chance something could go wrong. People are oftentimes looking for back-room paydays, I'm looking to avoid getting back-roomed. If it's a simple backrooming, I'm more inclined to just let it go, as I have in the past. Making a big stick will ensure you can never go back to that casino or others they might become affiliated with.



I take it these types of cases are relatively new to that jurisdiction, he happened to lose, but at some point, someone will no doubt get a big payday, it could have been him. I know firsthand timing is everything. What's that saying... Pioneers often get little but arrows in their backs?



I agree with this 100%.

Attorneys on both sides usually believe not only in their case but in their abilities.

It's a all or nothing proposition usually

I will say this for the record.

My attorney has been through many lawsuits and told me she had never gone to a trial. Every lawsuit of this nature had been settled out of court, and the general consensus amongst NY settlement attorneys was that 95% end in settlement after a few years wrangling. The NY court system, she said was particularly notorious for that. I'm going by what she told me. I haven't done any research into it.

This may have left her a bit green in court unfortunately but I believe her expectations were a few years of fighting followed by a reasonable settlement.

It didn't happen in this case

EDIT: To be clear she had been through court trials before but not this type of case. Like most attorneys she handles more than one type of law. Real estate law, contract law, etc.

EDIT EDIT:. A quick lookup confirms the 95% figure that cases get settled out of court.

https://thelawdictionary.org/article/what-percentage-of-lawsuits-settle-before-trial-what-are-some-statistics-on-personal-injury-settlements/
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26619
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
May 4th, 2021 at 9:41:40 AM permalink
Quote: DRich

I can't imagine a six figure judgement with any physical assault.



I know of one in Vegas. No, it's not Grosjean. I'm not allowed to say who or the casino, but as I understand it, he was never assaulted, but they threatened to do so.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26619
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
May 4th, 2021 at 10:00:27 AM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

I do admire DarkOz’s ‘balls’ in bringing this lawsuit. Not his brains.



Even taking principle out of it, I thought it was a good gamble. Especially with an attorney who worked entirely on contingency. The weekend before the trial, I would have bet on darkoz. I still stuck around NYC after the judge dismissed me and was hoping for a big celebration dinner. Oh well. It was a fun week for me, even though my hotel was way out by JFK. I think I took the A train into Manhattan four or five times and dinked around.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
MDawg
MDawg
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 7529
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
May 4th, 2021 at 10:01:04 AM permalink
In torts: The legal definition of assault involves no contact. The harmful or offensive touching without consent = battery.

If I raise my hands or fists to strike you and you feel threatened, that's assault. If I strike someone or pat a woman on the behind without consent, that is battery.

In crim law: the definitions are more or less the same, but to rise to the level of prosecution, the actions need to be a little more extreme.
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
  • Jump to: