Quantcast
MobileRJ | RSS Twitter Twitter FacebookFacebook E-mail Alerts
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

Opinion
Mar. 17, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

EDITORIAL: It's always somebody else's fault

Woman sues casinos over gambling problem

As a young lawyer, Arelia Margarita Taveras made a name for herself representing the families of victims of American Airlines Flight 587, which crashed in New York City's borough of Queens in November 2001, killing 265 people.

She had 400 clients and earned $500,000 a year. She appeared on TV and radio to discuss legal issues, and wrote a book titled "The Gangsta Girls' Guide To Child Support." In 2000, the New York Daily News named her one of "21 New Yorkers to Watch in the 21st Century."

Most Popular Stories
  • LETTERS: With economists like these, who needs enemies?
  • LETTERS: Brace yourself for coming tax hikes
  • LETTERS: Nuclear power could be the answer for Nevada
  • EDITORIAL: Firemen's pensions past due for reform
  • EDITORIAL: Education 'consultants'
  • EDITORIAL: Internet sales taxes
  • LETTERS: So now you're in favor of regulation, eh?
  • FROM OUR READERS: In the dark about the new light bulbs
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Letting the looters vote on who's for lunch
  • J.C. WATTS: Sonia Sotomayor and bootstraps




    • As an escape from the seven-day-a-week pressures of her law practice, she says she started going to Atlantic City to unwind in September 2003.

    And found it hard to stop.

    During one five-day gambling jag in June 2005, Ms. Taveras says, she existed on nothing but orange juice and Snickers bars the staff gave her. On the fifth day, she says, a dealer told her to go home because she appeared exhausted and unable to keep track of her cards.

    She reports her losses totaled nearly $1 million.

    "It's like crack, only gambling is worse than crack because it's mental," says Ms. Taveras, 37, a New Yorker who now lives in Minnesota. "It creeps up on you, the impulse. It's a sickness."

    She lost her law practice, her apartment, her parents' home, and owes the IRS $58,000. In interviews with The Associated Press, Ms. Taveras admits dipping into her clients' escrow accounts to finance her gambling habit. She was disbarred last June, and faces criminal charges stemming from those actions, but is trying to work out restitution agreements in order to avoid a prison term.

    She's doing one more thing, though -- still being a lawyer and all.

    Ms. Taveras has filed a $20 million lawsuit in federal court against six Atlantic City casinos and one in Las Vegas, claiming they had a duty to notice her compulsive gambling problem and cut her off.

    "I would pass out at the tables," Ms. Taveras says. "They had a duty of care to me."

    Her lawsuit names Resorts Atlantic City, Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino, Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort, the Tropicana Casino Resort, the Showboat Casino Hotel, Bally's Atlantic City, as well as the MGM Grand Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas.

    Some will doubtless say: "Casino owners -- couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of guys."

    Gamers love to show beaming winners with fistfuls of dollar bills in their ads, after all. Losers receive far less attention. And there's the recurring concern that the industry plays on one of the weaknesses of mankind -- the pursuit of the "high" of the big win, in defiance of the inescapable fact that casinos wouldn't exist if they weren't sure anyone who plays long enough will, eventually, lose.

    That's true. Other industries playing on human "weakness" -- selling products or services we might be better off without, that could do harm if indulged to excess -- include liquor bottlers, cigarette and candy manufacturers, pharmaceutical firms, fried food merchants, purveyors of parachutes, hang gliders, SCUBA lungs and motorcycles, even the manufacturers of flimsy sports cars capable of reaching speeds in excess of 100 mph. For starters.

    Shall the courts allow each and all to be sued for allowing a customer to be harmed when "They had a duty of care to me" -- a duty to refuse to allow an adult of normal intelligence to make his or her own decisions?

    No. A free country is based on the premise that adults will be held responsible for their own volitional actions.

    Make no mistake, if the courts allow such lawsuits to go forward against casinos, the line forms on the left for plaintiffs who will blame other industries for not "stopping me before I could spend again."

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 14 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    jackson wrote on March 17, 2008 10:07 PM: At first glance, this woman needs to take personal responsibility for her problems. After all, you can't sue Jack Daniels for being an alcoholic, or blame the liquor store for selling booze.

    Yet, do casinos have a responsibilty to provide information to compulsive gamblers? Yes, they do. And, there is information available at casinos for people who have a problem. But, do they have to put someone in a cab and have them driven to a treatment center? No, not any more than a bar does when someone drinks too much.

    This woman's lawsuit is dumb. She obviously knew she had a problem. She needed to be responsible for going to treatment, not expecting others to watch out for her. She probably would not have accepted help if offered, she had to hit rock bottom.

    Looks like she has.


    nevada taxpayer wrote on March 17, 2008 06:42 PM:
    I just read Judge Gamble in Douglas Co slapped 10 weekend in jail on a woman who embezzled $240,000 from a propane company to support her gambling addiction. The poor, poor woman...here comes the Twinkie defense!


    Only an attorney wrote on March 17, 2008 06:17 PM: Yup, here we go ... No one is responsible for their own behaviour or actions. There is always someone else to blame rather than taking personal responsibility. If I'm overweight, it's Taco Bell's fault! Oooops, I spilled coffee on myself, I think I will sue McDonalds. Darn, I'm a drunk -- pay up Jack Daniels. Oh no! I hit the car in front of me while text messaging --- it is my cell phones fault. What happened to saying "I messed up, this is my fault".

    Any surprise that a wiley attorney would have the nerve to try for something like this. Forget about her being an elected official in Nevada. She sounds like she could easily join the ranks of the over abundance of slimey ambulance chasing attorneys in the valley.


    RandolphRed wrote on March 17, 2008 02:30 PM: I'm addicted to comps! How many free drinks can I get for $3 dollars in the penny machines?


    rebel yell wrote on March 17, 2008 02:09 PM: Her case is frivolous. However, her victims might have a case against the casinos. I would think that even if they had no reason to believe that the money she gambled was stolen, the burden should be on the casinos to prove it. They are, after all, in possession of stolen property.


    paul wrote on March 17, 2008 01:30 PM: The worst thing the casinos could do is settle with this woman. They should fight it all the way. That's really what she wants, easy money to pay back those she stole from.


    politik wrote on March 17, 2008 11:04 AM: If this doesnt work for her she can always find a job as an elected official here in Nevada. She would fit in perfectly.


    Joan Baumeister wrote on March 17, 2008 09:56 AM: Dear Sherm,
    I have a compulsion to read your newspaper, wonder if I'll be able to sue when my vision goes.
    Good article!
    Joan Baumeister


    Tom, Burbank wrote on March 17, 2008 09:36 AM: "I would pass out at the tables," Ms. Taveras says. "They had a duty of care to me."

    Waaaaah. This legal beagle (arf arf) had a duty to take care of herself. She abrogated that duty to the point of breaking the law and harming her clients and family. This is a free country, and in a free country people have the right to make bad decisions. And this chick's made some doozies.


    douglas wrote on March 17, 2008 09:07 AM: how is this different from the "progressive" agenda, blaming the rest of the citizenry because a couple of drug dealers shoot each other ? or because some "parent" provides, permits, encourages, overlooks their minor child's gun play ?

    blaming neighbors for your chosen behavior is an extension of "the other dude did it" excuse. seems that the "progressive" agenda means that all other citizens "did it", rather than the criminal [oooops, "alleged perpetrator"].


    Read All Comments