It's hard to disagree with either side in the 2-1 ruling by the Indiana Court of Appeals, which held that a casino wasn't obligated to protect a problem gambler who lost $125,000 in a single night. The judges in the majority noted that the gambler, Jenny Kephart, had not asked the casino to bar her, as she could have done:
"Kephart has a responsibility to protect herself from her own proclivities and not rely on a casino to bear sole responsibility for her actions," the ruling said.
Absolutely. We are each responsible for our own actions. On the other hand, the casino allegedly went out of its way to entice her, sending a limousine to her door and offering her free meals and rooms, despite knowing she was a compulsive gambler who had emerged from bankruptcy four years earlier:
The third panel member, Judge Terry A. Crone, filed a dissent describing the casino's actions as morally "repugnant." He said the state failed to set high standards for casinos while reaping financial gains from them.
Even the other two judges said they were troubled that the casino would allow Kephart to cash dix markers to wager and then lose all the money, and they also sympathized with her plight because state law allows casinos to recoup triple the amount of unpaid funds and attorneys' fees.
Organized gambling -- the enterprise with no moral winners!