4 ms·
There was no criminal ruling in this case. The ruling is that the implicit contract of the game was voided, according to the Casino Control Act. Returning the f
by jdmichal 10y ago
There was no criminal ruling in this case. The ruling is that the implicit contract of the game was voided, according to the Casino Control Act. Returning the funds is just unwinding the executed contract.
You'll note that there are not even any punitive penalties being applied. Only the money earned during the game is to be returned.
- balls187 10y ago> Only the money earned during the game is to be returned. And proceeds that were gained using the winnings.
- qyv 10y agoDoes that also mean that lost money would need to be returned? Would the casino be obligated to notify past players of this and return their losses?
- jdmichal 10y agoSure. After they show that the casino knowingly used marked cards to gain advantage against them, as the casino did vs Ivey. Which I'm not even sure is possible in Baccarat, since my understanding is that it's a purely mechanical game from the house perspective, like Blackjack. As in, any choices made by the house are dependent only on information that is witnessed by all players.
- misja111 10y ago> Only the money earned during the game is to be returned. Part of the ruling was that Phil Ivy had to pay back $500,000 which he won in a craps game as well.
- jdmichal 10y agoIf I steal $100,000 dollars from you, then use some of that money to buy your car, would you expect to have your car returned to you?