Las Vegas Sun

November 30, 2009

Currently: 60° | Complete forecast | Log in

High court member raps disputed jackpots

Wednesday, March 29, 2000 | 11:24 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- A senior member of the Nevada Supreme Court suggested today that the state's welfare is being endangered by refusal of casinos to pay off jackpots based on technical reasons.

"The good will of the state is at stake," said Senior Justice David Zenoff during arguments over a disputed $1.8 million Quartermania jackpot at the Silver Legacy in Reno.

But Dan Reaser, attorney for the casino and IGT, which manufactured Quartermania, said Cengiz Sengel, lost "fair and square" and was not entitled to the jackpot.

The court, with three of its seven members disqualified, took the arguments under submission and will rule later.

Sengel of Belmont Calif., was playing Quartermania when the jackpot symbols lined up and the jackpot light started flashing in September 1996. IGT refused payment on grounds there was a security malfunction and the symbols were not properly lined up.

The malfunction occurred when the door to the cash box of the bill validator inside the machine was ajar and it caused the random selection process to stop, showing a jackpot on the payout line.

Sengel's attorney John White Jr., told the court there was a contract between the player and the casino. White said the player fulfilled his part by putting in the money and pulling the handle. The security device disabled the random selection process, White said. But he said that should not invalidate the contract.

This was a malfunction of non-gaming equipment, and the jackpot should be paid, White said.

But Reaser said the state Gaming Control Board and a district court in Reno have all ruled the malfunction means the jackpot should not be paid. "A malfunction voids all play," he said. And he added that the symbols were not perfectly aligned.

But Justice Bill Maupin, who was acting chief justice in the case, said, "It looks like a jackpot to me."

And Zenoff said the machine is under the control of the casino, not the player. "Why should the burden of the malfunction be on Mr. Sengel and not the casino?" he asked.

He said it's been a long-time premise that players "expect a clean table, a fair shake."

archive

  • Most Read
  • Discussed
  • Most E-mailed

Calendar »

  • 30 Mon
  • 1 Tue
  • 2 Wed
  • 3 Thu
  • 4 Fri