Chess Daily News by Susan Polgar

What Happens in Vegas Is Still Your Fault
Sep 24th 2008
By Tom Radler

Every once in a while you hear a story of litigation that makes you think that personal responsibility may be on the way out. But just like the obese people who sued McDonald’s for making them fat, a former New York attorney won’t get a cent for claiming that other people forced her to behave recklessly.

Arelia Margarita Taveras sued seven casinos for aiding and abetting her gambling addiction, asking for $20 million in damages. She claims that the casinos knew of her addiction and they did nothing to stop her from throwing away nearly $1 million in less than two years.

The judge rejected her argument by explaining that, “Playing blackjack, roulette or the slots bears no likeness to dumping toxic waste. She spent money on the bona fide chance that she might win more money. In short, she gambled.

“Taveras is planning an appeal, and responded to the verdict by maintaining that casinos “have a duty of care to gamblers, and people are dying because of it.”

Source: http://www.asylum.com/

What do you think about the claim by this woman?

Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar

Susan Polgar September 25, 2008 Daily News 14 Comments

Tags: Gambling

14 comments

Anonymous says:

September 25, 2008 at 1:19 pm

What would this stupid woman have done if she had won a million? I wonder if the casinos would have sued her!

Anonymous says:

September 25, 2008 at 1:27 pm

She should be put in jail. Stupid…

Anonymous says:

September 25, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Very simple:

People who can’t take responsibility for their own actions have to be put into a lunatic asylum in order to protect both – them and society.

pork dinner says:

September 25, 2008 at 2:39 pm

She is a perfect match for Slam Lsaon, Marcu Roberti, and J.A. Laugherty.

Maybe they should all marry her and make crazy brain-damaged children together.

Anonymous says:

September 25, 2008 at 2:45 pm

The common law principle of “the reasonable man” is black letter law. Every state, except Lousiana where the Napoleonic Code applies, has common law precedent cases and state statutes defining “the reasonable man”.

Did this woman’s actions fall inside the definition that reasonable man standard? So far the court that has jurisdiction in this case is saying NO.

This is about all that can be said about this case based on your brief description. Without access to the pleadings and procedure & depositions, interrogatories, etc. it is impossible to write an informed opinion.

The legal theory that her attorneys may be trying to argue is the “strict liability” issue very similar to the one that is applied in Florida to stock brokers and financial advisors. Strict liability places the burden of proof on the manufacturer of the product.

This burden of proof has financial costs (attorney fees, court costs, etc.) and of course encourages the
defendant to settle with the plaintiff even though there may be no wrongdoing simply because it will cost less than going to court.

Jack says:

September 25, 2008 at 3:34 pm

She is making another gamble — this time in the court instead of the casino.

Chessvine.com says:

September 25, 2008 at 3:44 pm

How is what the Casino did any different from the tobacco companies? Gambling is a recognized addiction … its treatment should be the burden of the cause of the addiction. People only see it as ludicrous because it is … just as big tobacco isn’t responsible for how much you smoke or your local dealer isn’t responsible what you do with his drugs.

Anonymous says:

September 25, 2008 at 4:03 pm

Only In America.. stupid woamen

Anonymous says:

September 25, 2008 at 5:45 pm

Maybe I should sue Susan for setting up such a good website. It distracts me from working, leading to longer working hours and loss of private loss. Actually, the more I think about it this sounds like a great idea…

voice of reason says:

September 25, 2008 at 7:59 pm

“Maybe I should sue Susan for setting up such a good website. It distracts me from working, leading to longer working hours and loss of private loss. Actually, the more I think about it this sounds like a great idea…”

Yeah, keep dreaming Sam. I think you need to save up more food stamps if you wish to sue again. Didn’t you use up your life savings of $200 in the last lawsuit.

You probly have to pimp out Kayo to make a few bucks.

Loser.

Anonymous says:

September 25, 2008 at 11:20 pm

“Maybe I should sue Susan for setting up such a good website.

He was just being sarcastic to point out the stupidity of the lawsuit.

The woman attorney who filed the lawsuit is the reason for lawyer jokes in America. It’s like the judge who sued his dry cleaner for $54 million because they lost his pants

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062500443.html