John Doe A v. Penn State
First Penn State scandal lawsuit says Coach Jerry Sandusky sexually abused a boy more than 100 times and the abuse was enabled by the school's "negligent oversight."
Bradley v. Lohan
Former Betty Ford Center employee sues Lindsay Lohan for assault, alleging the actress threw a phone at her and yanked her wrist while refusing to be breathalzyed.
N.D. v. New York Post
Hotel maid allegedly raped by French politician sues the New York Post for falsely reporting that she is a prostitute who "routinely traded sex for money" with male guests.
Reinhart v. Mortenson
Two Montana residents allege the author of "Three Cups of Tea" "fabricated material about his activities and work in Pakistan and Afghanistan" to sell the book.
lc_search
LC_DayByDay

 Apr   May 12   Jun

SMTWTFS
   1  2  3  4  5
  6  7  8  9101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031 
Julianna Walker Willis Technology
LC_BySubject
OnTheMap

rss

LC_ExtraPoints

• Maryland appeals court says dog owners can be held strictly liable for pit bull attacks. "Because of its aggressive and vicious nature and its capability to inflict serious and sometimes fatal injuries, pit bulls and cross-bred pit bulls are inherently dangerous." Tracey v. Solesky

• Woman who has been diagnosed as a sex addict sues a school district for failing to prevent her from having sex with male students on the school bus when she was in 11th grade.
Barksdale v. Egg Harbor Township Bd. of Ed.

• Civil rights activist challenges Georgia's "stand your ground law." "By not defining what actions create a reasonable perception justifying the use of deadly force, the Act[] potentially deprives all Georgia[n]s of the right to life without due process of law." Hutchins v. Deal

• Former patient of a Rhode Island doctor sues him for featuring her in a book about drug addiction. "Plaintiff had expected, as any reasonable patient would, that her private conversations during her treatment sessions with the Defendant would remain private and confidential."
Lisnoff v. Stein

• Class action alleges the YMCA deceives consumers by representing that it practices "Christian" values while allowing its gyms to be used for gay sex trysts. "YMCAs around the country ... are currently being used as brothels for cruising, with the YMCA's knowledge and implicit consent."
Keister v. YMCA

• Social workers are not liable for a sexual assault on a 5-year-old boy by a 16-year-old male placed in an adoptive home. "To rule against the individual defendants in this case would definitely break new ground."
Doe v. Braddy

• Student sues college for refusing to grant her the "reasonable accommodation" of a single room after she complained about her roommate's exhibitionist behavior.
Blankmeyer v. Stonehill College

• School district can be sued over a guidance counselor's sexual relationship with a student who was over the age of consent. "The inherent imbalance of power between a guidance counselor in a public school and a student may render opportunistic sexual predation sufficiently shocking, even with a 'consenting' student over sixteen, to form the basis of a substantive due process claim."
Doe v. Fournier

• Utah judge finds a "credible threat" that Utah County officials will prosecute a polygamist and his wives for bigamy. The officials' acts "suggest that an actual prosecution of Plaintiffs is forthcoming."
Brown v. Herbert

• Louisville, Ky., strip club sues a competitor for displaying an electronic sign outside a convention center that said "Don't go to Godfathers, their girls are ugly and have crabs."
The Godfather v. Trixie's Lounge

• A lawyer cannot sue two women he dated for posting derogatory comments about him on liarscheatersrus.com. "[W]hen viewed within the larger context of the website on which they were posted, there can be no doubt that a reasonable reader would understand the comments to be opinion." Coulotte v. Ryncarz

• Oglala Sioux tribe sues beer makers and Whiteclay, Neb., bars for enabling alcohol abuse on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. The illegal trade in alcohol has "caused devastating injuries to the Lakota people and massive financial damages to the [tribe]."
Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Schwarting




Alltop_125x125.jpg








Gambling Addiction Case Comes out Trumps for Casino Print

In a decision that a dissenting justice called “particularly disturbing,” the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that a compulsive gambler cannot sue a casino for enticing her to gamble when it knew of her addiction.

The ruling in Jenny Kephart's case was part of a double jackpot for the gaming industry as the Supreme Court also decided Sept. 30 that a Rising Sun, Ind., casino could exclude a blackjack player from its premises for counting cards.

Kephart, of Goodlettsville, Tenn., lost $125,000 in a single night of gambling in March 2006, using six counter checks provided to her by Caesars Riverboat Casino in Elizabeth, Ind. In seeking damages for emotional and other injuries, she alleged the casino had a common-law duty to protect her from herself.

But a 4-1 majority of the Supreme Court said the Legislature had “abrogated the common law” by requiring the Indiana Gaming Commission to enact a program under which a gambler may “make a request to have his or her name placed on a voluntary exclusion list” from casinos. Kephart had not asked to be put on the list.

“The existence of the voluntary exclusion program suggests the legislature intended pathological gamblers to take personal responsibility to prevent and protect themselves against compulsive gambling,” Justice Robert D. Rucker wrote for the majority, and

Kephart’s claim directly conflicts with the legislature’s choice. To allow Kephart’s claim to go forward under the common law would shift primary responsibility from the gambler to casino.

In a dissent, Justice Brent E. Dickson found “the result in this case is particularly disturbing. The Court today holds that a gambling casino may with impunity entice a person the casino knows to be a pathological gambler by offering free transportation from Tennessee to the Indiana casino, providing her with a free hotel room, food, and alcohol, and then extending her credit to gamble at the casino where she not surprisingly suffers $125,000 in casino gambling losses.”

Compulsive gamblers have generally not fared well with claims against casinos. In 2008, for example, a New Jersey judge dismissed the case of an attorney who lost nearly $1 million at casinos in Atlantic City and Las Vegas.

Caesars originally sued Kephart in January 2007 for payment of the counter checks it had provided to her. She filed a counterclaim alleging the casino knew of her addiction to gambling and took advantage of her condition to enrich itself.

The case was one of first impression in Indiana. A Harrison Circuit Court judge denied Caesars' motion to dismiss Kephart's counterclaim but the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed in a 2-1 decision, finding “[t]here is no common law duty obligating a casino operator to refrain from attempting to entice or contact gamblers that it knows or should know are compulsive gamblers.”

The Supreme Court majority took a different approach. Even assuming casino owners have such a duty, it said, “we are of the view that the Legislature has abrogated the common law.”

But the opinion ignored the legal principle that “statutes in derogation of the common law are to be construed narrowly.” “Nowhere in Indiana's statutory system of gambling regulation,” Dickson said in his dissent, “is there any provision that expressly or unmistakably abrogates Indiana's common law requiring business operators to exercise reasonable care for the safety of their customers and subjecting them to accountability in damages for failing to do so.”

In the card counting case, moreover, another 4-1 majority found abrogation did not apply to the “long-standing common law right of private property owners” to exclude a visitor or customer. The gaming commission's rules, Justice Frank Sullivan wrote, “at the very least do not evince an express intent by the Commission to alter common law exclusion rights.” Donovan v. Grand Victoria Casino.

Justice Dickson, again the dissenter, pointed out the inconsistency:

The Court in Kephart finds that Indiana's statutory scheme of riverboat gambling regulation and the plaintiff's common law claim in that case are “so incompatible that they cannot both occupy the same space.” If this is so, the same principle should be applied here.

This story linked by:


By Matthew Heller
10/3/10


 

Editor's note: On Point's RSS feed has moved to this link.

rc_insidestories
  • Court Extends Doctors' Liability for Prescription Gaffes

    The Utah Supreme Court has given a boost to the battle against prescription drug abuse by ruling that medical professionals can be sued over injuries to a nonpatient that were allegedly caused by  drugs they carelessly prescribed to patients.
    Read more...
  • Girl's Slaying Tests Cruise Line Liability

    The family of a 15-year-old girl who was killed in the crossfire of a gang shootout on a Caribbean island has asked an appeals court to reinstate a lawsuit that tests the liability of cruise ship operators for onshore injuries to passengers.
    Read more...
  • Bystander Claims "Swoon and Fall" Injuries at Church

    In yet another “swoon and fall” case against a church, an Illinois woman claims she was injured during a church service when a parishioner who was receiving the “spirit” fell backward, knocking several other worshippers into her.
    Read more...
  • Jurors' Comments Fuel New Trial Bid in Bullying Case

    Jurors may have opened the door to a new trial in a Maryland school bullying case by saying they returned a verdict for the defense because they were afraid of setting a bad precedent for school systems throughout the country.
    Read more...
  • Abuse Victim Can Sue Ex-DA Over 'Sexting' Messages

    A Wisconsin judge has protected a domestic violence victim from a rogue prosecutor, finding that she can sue him for sending her text messages in which he pressured her to have sex with him.
    Read more...
  • Four Loko Maker Says Users Knew of Health Dangers

    The maker of Four Loko has previewed its defense of a slew of product liability lawsuits, arguing that the physical effects of the energy drink's mixture of alcohol and caffeine — far from being an undisclosed risk to consumers — are precisely what made it so popular.
    Read more...
  • Mortician Sued for Speaking Ill of the Dead

    In a first-of-its-kind unprofessional conduct lawsuit, a woman has sued her former boss at a Michigan funeral home for making an indecent comment about the body of a dead man in front of her.
    Read more...
RC_OnFile

U.S. v. Arpaio
Subject: Civil rights
Document: Complaint

Schultz v. Medina Valley
Subject: School prayer
Document: Non-Kumbaya order

Chopourian v. Catholic Healthcare
Subject: Sexual harassment
Document: Verdict

Jackson v. Paula Deen
Subject: Sexual harassment
Document: Complaint

Marsh v. Air Tran Airways
Subject: Roaches on a plane
Document: Complaint

more

RC_OnTrial

Peterson/Pryde v. Thyden
Court: Montgomery (Va.) Circuit
Subject: Virginia Tech shootings
Verdict: $8 million

Sheridan v. Cherry
Court: L.A. Superior
Subject: Wrongful termination

more


RC_OnTheDocket

Brown v. Herbert
Date: 12/16/11
Court: USDC, Utah
Hearing: Motion to dismiss polygamy case

more