"30 years play in LV at the highest levels" -really?
It's surprising you don't know JWP.
Shoot, I've only been around awhile, and I know who the guy is.
I doubt he's playing at the 6:5 red chip table.
John, I failed to locate Wilkinson case when searching thru NV Supreme Court rulings, but I did find a more juicy case about Canterino vs Mirage. It seems that if we can't beat casinos in their own games, then perhaps we can find other ways like Canterino's. Ouch! It can be painful.
...Joseph Canterino sued the Mirage Casino-Hotel for damages incurred after being beaten and robbed in the hotel hallway. After a nine-day trial, the jury awarded Joseph Canterino $5,760,291.35 in damages for past and future physical pain and mental anguish, physical impairment, lost earning capacity and medical expenses...
...Canterino presented the following evidence. In April 1992, Canterino traveled from New York to Las Vegas with $100,000.00 to gamble. He reserved a room at the Mirage for the duration of his stay. On his second day at the Mirage, Canterino left his hotel room and was walking down the hallway when he was approached by a stranger. As Canterino glanced in the man�s direction, another man hit Canterino in the head with a baseball bat. The two men repeatedly hit Canterino and stole his fanny pack where he kept his money. Canterino�s attackers were never apprehended. Canterino testified to his injuries, and presented extensive medical evidence of permanent physical, neurological and psychological injuries.
The Mirage presented evidence to show that it had no liability and, through cross-examination of Canterino�s witnesses, attempted to challenge the cause, nature and severity of Canterino�s injuries.
After jury instructions and closing arguments, the eight-person jury retired to deliberate. After deliberating for some time, the jury submitted a question to the district court. The jury asked: "If 6 (Jurors) agree that the defendant was negligent . . . can the obstaining [sic] 2 (Jurors) � participate in determing [sic] damages? Please advise?" Initially, the district court told the bailiff to contact the attorneys as required under NRS 16.140. The bailiff told the judge that the Mirage�s lead attorney was unavailable but she left the name of another attorney to contact. The judge decided not to contact the replacement attorney or Canterino�s attorney and simply responded to the jury question, instructing that the two jurors voting against liability could not participate in the damage award determination. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Canterino for $5,760,291.35 about half an hour later...
"lost earning capacity,� means exactly. It is noted in the list of awarded damages in the Canterino case. That's very interesting if it's refering to the $ which he could have potentially won had he been able to play in the casino. I wonder if it was separately itemized and if so, what $ figure they put on it.
Listen for it is worth I'm done getting in a pissing contest with you. While I will not agree with you, that what you are doing is right or has merit. This is a free country. I served and believe in it. I will defend your right to say anything. However your time, honestly, would be better spent doing something more constructive with your time and money. The are many more countermeasures that a casino can take than you can protest. In the end the only people that are going to be hurt are the lower level players. The pros can and will survive. Whatever happens please do not promise the players on this or any other board what a "Golden" opportunity this is.
Good Luck to You and try to do the right thing not the easy thing.
Mahalo
Bomber, I could not find the breakdown of the $5,760,291.35 in damages, but I guess the casino-hated jurists came up with these figures:
Past and future physical pain: $2,000,000
Mental anguish: $1,500,000
Physical impairment: $1,500,000
Lost earning capacity: $500,000 (based on his past wages)
Medical expenses: $ 260,291.35
By the way, I was surprise that there was no breakdown of damages in Canterino case. However, Campione case did get the breakdown of the $1,519,873.43 in damages:
1) $300,625.87 against Tropicana Casino and Imperatrice for discriminating against Campinoe because he was a card counter.
2) $219,034.06 against Tropicana and Scully as compensatory damages for malicious prosecution
3) $1,000,213.50 for punitive damages against Tropicana on the malicious prosecution claim.
Meanwhile, I'll keep searching for the Wilkinson case. When I find it, I'll post it here for everyone to see.
Wilkinson case: You must be asked to leave before being arrested for trespass
The initial case was The State of Nevada v. Jackie Owens, also known as Annette Wilkinson, case number 0662-78M in the Justice Court of Las Vegas Township, Clark County, Nevada, on 9 March 1978. The facts were that Security Guard Frank M. Baker of the Holiday Casino took Wilkinson and other female to the Security Office on 11 December 1977, advised her that she was not welcome, and read her the Trespass Act. When he again saw her in the casino on 17 February 1978, he placed her under Citizens�s Arrest for trespass. On neither occasion was Wilkinson annoying either the owner or any other occupant of the hotel. She was not acting in a disorderly manner. Nor did she destroy any property. Nor did she cause a public disturbance. Mr. Baker testified that he saw Wilkinson commit no misdemeanor or felony other than his belief that she had committed trespass against the hotel. Wilkinson was found guilty of trespassing and fined $50.
On 23 March 1978, an appeal was filed, case number C40816 in the Eighth Judicial District Court of the State Of Nevada. The conclusion of the appeal:
1. The Criminal Trespass Statute, NRS 207.200, is unconstitutional in its application against Defendant Annette Wilkinson aka Jackie Owens and the case is ordered dismissed.
2. The evidence produced at the trial is insufficient to cause Defendant Wilkinson to be found guilty since she was not given an opportunity to leave the hotel on the date of her arrest, being February 17, 1978.
3. The evidence is insufficient to convict the Defendant since no acts of misconduct occurred either on the date she was originally told not to return to the hotel nor on the date of her arrest.
Signed: Thomas J. O�Donnell, District Court Judge
You must be given the opportunity to leave before arrested. No matter how many times you come back. Unfortunately this point is lost on most security/casino people. So don't argue, don't pitch a bitch, just leave. If you are about to be illegaly detain, then its your call, several schools of thought on this. Thanks, AM.
..........., chargin' from the gate
Like a ROCK, standin' arrow straight
