Gambler sues lotteries corp.

This is akin to suing a bar because your an alcoholic or suing your drug dealer cause your an addict, or suing the 7-11 because your addicted to cigarettes.
Get real lady, if you were serious about quitting gambeling then you would seek professional help. I think it's wrong to blame the casino for your financial problems, take responsability for your own actions and stop looking for the free ride.
She's probably gonna win her case (sadly) cause no ones accountable these days for their own self destruction. Then what happens? She gambles away her new found fortune.
Fatc is that if the casinos did enforce their "voluntary ban" then she would have blown her money on a VLT or at the bingo hall, so step up and blame the person you should, YOURSELF!

Now she is gambling again only in court

She's probably going to win if she can prove she was registered in the exclusion program. It removes the accountability from the gambler to exercise self control to the casinos to enforce the control.

I have mixed feelings about it, but thems the rulz!

The rulz in this case suck big time, too many people want their hands held throughout their entire lives, theres no accountability in the world today (or it's misplaced to make anyone but people like her responsable).
Sad Sad world.

I dont even know why Casinos have these exclusion programs, maybe she went it with a disguise each time or something. Every other form of addiction doesn't have an exclusion program.

Proof of a disguise would exclude her exclusion and she'd lose.

I guess there are only a few casinos in any particular area that can actually control who comes and goes. There are too many booze and cigarette outlets to monitor the same way.

The illegal drug dealers just don't want to play.

I can see how she will probably win the suit. The lottery corporation has a program to keep people out who voluntarily ask to be kept out. However if the lottery corporation actually did nothing to enforce the program then I can see negligence in that the lottery corporation did not make a reasonable attempt (or any attempt) to keep the lady out as the program is suppose to work, therefore they gave the lady false hope that they would help her stay out of the casinos. If the lottery corporation was never serious in enforcing the program they should not have offered the program. Definitely not 'beyond a reasonable doubt' proof but definitely 'balance of probabilities' proof, which is what you need in civil court.

Imagine the moronic irony if she wins a cash settlement and pisses it all away at the same or different casino... If I were the lawyers for a casino I would offer to pay for her therapy for one year and nothing else. No cash. And they'd have a strong no cash arguement considering her condition.

AND they should freaking keep her out of that casino! Excuse me, but if you say you have a program, you sign people up for it, enforce it!! They didn't!
Anyway, no cash is a good idea

Taser her every time she walks into a casino. That will keep her away, one way or another.

If the Casino is smart they should settle with her for a fairly good chunk of money. Then the casino should offer her a room for a week or so. They will get their money back in no time.

giving her false hope and not acting on it, might be considered fraud leading to delayed treatment. I think she has a case. I wish her luck.

I'm giving 2-1 to anyone who wants to bet she's wins this. BET BET BET BET!!!!!

This is freaking stupid. If you are banned from a place then that means you don't go there, especially when you have agreed to being banned. She should not get a penny out of this just a reminder about what banned means and get some therapy to deal with that little gambling problem.

Besides, something tells me that if she had been tossed out of the casino she would have sued for violating her freedom or being roughed up by security or something equally as wastful of court time and resources as this is.