Has anyone ever been jailed or fined for violating a trespass? A few years back I was backroomed in a casino in Nevada. They took my picture and I signed a document agreeing not to return. I later called the casino and asked if I could enter to eat at their restaurant. They allowed that much.
For what it's worth, I was new to the game. Knowing what I know now, I would have handled the situation differently.
Is this just a scare tactic, or is this enforceable?
It sounds like your question is, "is trespassing a criminal offense?" to which the general answer is yes.
Without knowing much of anything, I suspect whatever you signed would be enforceable at that property. It is legally dubious to think it carries over to other properties (even if they told you it did).
Without all the details this is all speculation anyway.
With usual caveats that this is not legal advice...
NRS 207.200 says that a person is guilty of trespass who (b) wilfully goes or remains upon any land or in any building after having been warned by the owner or occupant thereof not to trespass”.
2(d) of the statute says the warning may be “oral or written”. Incidentally, 2(d) specifically refers to “guests” which are defined as “any person entertained or to whom hospitality is extended”. (You call 6:5 and 60% pen hospitality! ????)
Finally, the offence is a misdemeanour meaning the maximum penalty is a fine of up to 40 units, er, $1,000 or jail up to 6 months.
SO, while most first time trespassers who are charged and convicted are usually looking at a fine, consider the tremendous inconvenience of attending court, legal fees and criminal record as far worse than the trivial nature of the offence and penalty.
Bob Nersessian went on a great rant about this on GWAE a while back. I’d recommend you find that episode.
Bob made the point that trespasses are usually limited to the specific property, but there are exceptions depending on the corporate ownership structure. FWIW, I read the statute the same way.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I was issued a verbal trespass warning at a CET property (playing anon). I only half listened to it as I turned away and headed for the door, so I didn't hear whether or not the "bla..bla..bla" included all CET properties. But even if it did, I don't see how that could be legal. What am I supposed to do - go home and do research on the property ownership structure of CET?Originally Posted by Red Green
It isn't. If you've listened to Nesesian on GWAE, or read his book, you'll know that most CET casinos have individual holding corporations. So, an employee of one is not an employee of the entire chain and has no legal authority to assert over you relating to other properties.
That doesn't mean they can't have you arrested at another property, as the cops aren't likely to understand this. it's then your time and money to prove them in error.
There have been other inquiries in this point over the years. My comments suvpbject to legal verification.
In order to be legally enforceable, a tresspass at other properties if the same chain, the second property must be part of the EXACT ownership structure of the first. Thus, if I own 61% shares of Casino A, and only 57% of casino B, that provision of ownership us not met, therefore the trespass at Casino B is not enforceable. Now, if I own an entity, which has total control over 2 properties, those 2 properties being under 1 entity, the trespass warning us enforceable.
Extending the example, I own a casino, and I've barred an asshole for whatever reason. I sell the casino - is the trespass if the asshole enforceable. It depends. If I've sold the assets if the corporation, to another corporation, a differing ownership structure is now in control. Therefore, the tressoass is no longer enforceable. If I've sold differing percentages of shares to 2 or more entities, the trespass is no longer enforceable. If I've sold all of my shares to another entity, the share structure us intact, therefore the trespass is enforceable.
Simple rule of thumb - is the sale an asset sale or share sale.
Laws can't be enforced retroactively in the US. So the ban should be unaffected by future law changes. Your transgressions are subject only to the laws that existed when the act is committed.
The new law only protects you from being banned for your skills. I don't think it grants clemency for past transgressions. Even if the new law lifted being banned for being a skilled player. Can you prove that age old ban was for your skills and for no other reason?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks