USTON v. RESORTS INTERNATIONAL HOTEL, INC. Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A casino excluded a professional card counter. The court held that property owners who open their premises to the public do not have an absolute right to exclude patrons; they have a duty of reasonable access and cannot exclude skilled players who abide by the rules.
Legal Significance: This case establishes that the common law right to exclude from property open to the public is not absolute but is limited by a duty of reasonable access, preventing arbitrary or unreasonable exclusion of patrons who are not disruptive.
USTON v. RESORTS INTERNATIONAL HOTEL, INC. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Kenneth Uston, a professional card counter, was excluded from the blackjack tables at Resorts International Hotel, Inc. (Resorts). Uston utilized a card-counting strategy that, while not violating any game rules, increased his odds of winning. After the Casino Control Commission (Commission) promulgated new rules that enhanced the effectiveness of card counting, Resorts barred Uston. Resorts claimed it possessed a common law right to exclude any person from its property for any reason not related to civil rights. The Commission, which has comprehensive statutory authority to regulate all aspects of casino gaming, had not issued any rule prohibiting card counting. Uston challenged his exclusion, arguing that Resorts had no right to bar him for skillfully playing the game according to the official rules.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a casino, as a private property owner operating a place of public accommodation, have a common law right to exclude a patron for using a skillful playing strategy that does not violate the rules of the game?
No. Resorts cannot exclude Uston for card counting. The court held that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia des
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does a casino, as a private property owner operating a place of public accommodation, have a common law right to exclude a patron for using a skillful playing strategy that does not violate the rules of the game?
Conclusion
This decision significantly limits the traditional common law right to exclude for Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation u
Legal Rule
When private property is opened to the public, the owner's common law Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex
Legal Analysis
The court's primary holding rests on statutory preemption. It found that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The New Jersey Casino Control Act gives the Casino Control Commission