Chuck E. Cheese's sued for tot 'slot machines'

[buzz_n64]

A San Diego woman has sued the company that owns the Chuck E. Cheese’s family restaurant chain, claiming that many of the games intended for children at these locations are actually illegal gambling devices — like slot machines.

Denise Keller, a local real estate agent and mother of two daughters ages 3 and 5, filed the potential class-action suit in U.S. District Court March 29. According to court documents, she is asking for a jury trial and damages and restitution of at least $5 million.

But attorney Eric Benink, who represents Keller, said the money is a secondary issue. The purpose of the lawsuit, he said, is to prevent Texas-based CEC Entertainment Inc., which owns and operates the restaurants in 48 states, from keeping the machines in its game rooms...

Full story- http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/may/12/federal-lawsuit-claims-chuck-e-cheese-promotes-ill/
San Diego Union Tribune

I'm sorry that she's from my hometown, I apologize for her stupidity.

[Porksta]

The money issue is ridiculous, but she does have a point.

[kupomogli]

How can she really sue for five million anyways? I mean did the machines actually affect her other than being illegal? She saw one, decided to probably look up and see if Chuck E Cheese paid gambling fees or was in a state that considered gambling illegal and then brought them to court for the sole purpose of trying to get money that she doesn't deserve? I'd think a slot machine in an area where it is illegal would be a large fine from the government.

Oh noes. Her kids are three and five. Their minds have been warped by "being under her supervision while playing this evil gambling game." Then she happened to come to her senses and realized. OMG. It's illegal. I need to sue for 2k(x2500) monies.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I was under the impression that coin-op redemption games that do not pay out in cash are not technically "gambling" games.

Gambling money for money is illegal in many states yet there are/were arcades that had token/ticket pay-out slot machines, video poker, coin push games, even skill games like ski-ball or claw machines as well as many other varieties of games nearly everywhere that were legal to have for amusement purposes.

I'm not up on California's laws on the subject, but technically couldn't any of those theoretically be considered "gambling" as there is ultimately a risk of zero reward for cash paid ... and if that IS the case why were they not illegal in every single state that had/continues to have them in arcades/stores/malls/movie theatres/etc. over the years?

I'm thinking when it finally gets to the courts there's no real case to be had.

[buzz_n64]

Check out this cool response video.

Woman Sues Chuck E. Cheese!!!!
http://youtu.be/tazQmzXoLHE

Even if she wins the lawsuit, she is then guilty of participating in the illegal gambling and can then be arrested. She can't win! Anyways, if she does win, she should be awarded by the judge 5 million prize tickets. :D

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Nolan Bushnell does not approve of suing Chuck E. Cheese.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2007/04/bushnell2-9937.jpg

[TonyTheTiger]

It's definitely a reasonable issue to take up. Not just about Chuck E. Cheese but lots of things we consider just mundane aspects of children's entertainment.

If you want to get super technical, whenever you pay money for a chance, that's gambling. So putting a quarter in a machine in the hopes of it spitting out the trinket you hoped for is not really any different than putting a quarter in a slot machine at the Tropicana in the hopes of it spitting out $1,000 you hoped for.

I can't comment on the lawsuit, but there is a school of thought that stuff like Pokemon cards (where you pay money for the chance that there's a rare one inside), redemption machines, and boardwalk/carnival games are basically hooking kids young, so to speak, making sure they not only keep pumping quarters in those machines but inadvertently drive them to the racetrack as soon as they turn 18. Hell, there are boardwalk games that actually do involve (plastic) horse racing.

I'm mostly a personal responsibility guy and don't think it's quite that dire, but it's not an entirely meritless argument.

The idea of a kid version of something traditionally for adults is pretty commonplace. From candy cigarettes (which are far less common these days), to power wheels, to those increasingly more realistic (and sometimes creepy) baby dolls.

Again, I don't think it's dire. But I think we do have at least some sense of a line there somewhere. If not a legal one then an ethical one.

[skaar]

I'm thankful I live in a world where other people can give a shit about things nobody else does.

Then sue about it.

[Flack]

I was under the impression that coin-op redemption games that do not pay out in cash are not technically "gambling" games.

Gambling money for money is illegal in many states yet there are/were arcades that had token/ticket pay-out slot machines, video poker, coin push games, even skill games like ski-ball or claw machines as well as many other varieties of games nearly everywhere that were legal to have for amusement purposes.

I'm not up on California's laws on the subject, but technically couldn't any of those theoretically be considered "gambling" as there is ultimately a risk of zero reward for cash paid ... and if that IS the case why were they not illegal in every single state that had/continues to have them in arcades/stores/malls/movie theatres/etc. over the years?

I'm thinking when it finally gets to the courts there's no real case to be had.

The way it was explained to me one time (by a guy who knew a guy who knew a guy) was that those games are not gambling, because the law defines gambling as games of "chance" versus those other games, which are defined as games of "skill". For example take a crane game. We all know they're rigged, but pretend they aren't for a minute. The idea is that picking up stuffed animals is a skill, and not a game of chance. This ruling was partially responsible for the influx of those "skill stop" slot machines. Normally, slot machines are a game of chance -- gambling. But if the player has to manually stop each reel, it becomes a game of skill -- skill, not gambling.

All of the kiddie games I've seen at CEC and places like that involve some sort of human interaction, even if it's simply pressing a button to stop a wheel or timing exactly when you drop the token into the "pushing tray" machine.

Most of those ticket redemption games fall under the same umbrella as midway games at the fair. If anything comes out of this at all, it may be that the games will have to be labelled as "games of skill" or something like that. No way anybody's getting $5 million.

[TonyTheTiger]

I'm not sure what the legal definition is but I doubt it can just be a matter of human interaction. Otherwise something like Craps would be perfectly legal for minors to play. Or maybe Black Jack or Poker where skill (or mathmatics) can make a huge difference between winning and losing.

[Satoshi_Matrix]

wow. what a bitch. Those coin-op redemption games were the ONLY thing I liked about Chuck E. Cheese parties when I was a kid. Way to spoil the fun of millions of kids lady.

[pixelsnpolygons]

Perhaps she should move her kids to Marshfield, Massachusetts.

[goatdan]

I can't comment on the lawsuit, but there is a school of thought that stuff like Pokemon cards (where you pay money for the chance that there's a rare one inside), redemption machines, and boardwalk/carnival games are basically hooking kids young, so to speak, making sure they not only keep pumping quarters in those machines but inadvertently drive them to the racetrack as soon as they turn 18. Hell, there are boardwalk games that actually do involve (plastic) horse racing.

I'm mostly a personal responsibility guy and don't think it's quite that dire, but it's not an entirely meritless argument.

The problem is just when does it stop? The whole Pokemon stuff might have a rare card argument, which I've heard before, is similar to saying that we should stop selling all baseball cards because if they get an Alex Rodriguez that is worth more than they paid for the pack of cards, it could be gambling. There is most definitely no skill in buying a pack of cards, right?

The thing about the CEC games is that they all either have *some* aspect of skill to them -- yeah, the coin may just go down a ramp into a slot (Smokin' Token, I'm lookin' at you) but the timing of when you put that coin in has to do with if it scores 1 ticket or 500 tickets. Slot machines have zero skill involved, so it's a different beast.

Having said that, I worked at an FEC once where the owner was seriously considering buying slot machines and rigging them to spit tickets. I told him he was crazy.

In this case, either she'll win in California under their law and CEC will have to change how they run their California stores but there will be no cash reward, or she'll lose. Ain't no way they are going to agree with it. The only potential problem will be actually demonstrating 'skill' in some of those games, but it is definitely something I think that can be argued.

[leatherrebel5150]

It's definitely a reasonable issue to take up. Not just about Chuck E. Cheese but lots of things we consider just mundane aspects of children's entertainment.
.

^C'mon really? A resonable issue to take up? It is just stupid to even consider making this an issue. "Oh no, my kid played a game that resembles a slot machine, oh god what will I do?"

Regardless of what the game is similar to, whether it be a slot like game, video poker, or skee ball IT IS JUST A FRIKIN GAME!

I don't even understand what the danger is for kids, that they would become addicted to gambling? I've went to Chuck E. Cheeses tons of times when I was a kid and never thought, after playing the games, dam I want to hit up a casino.

This is just another one of those cases of trying to protect kids from a non-existant danger just because some idiot doesn't like it something for their kids it must be dangerous and must be eliminated. It is just like the story that came out of California not too long ago about the state or a city wanted to force McDonald's to remove toys from the happy meals because it attracted kids too not so healthy food. You can't eliminate danger and bad influence so just stop destroying the fun for the rest of us.:onfire:

All of this can be resolved from one thing...Parenting.

Teach your kids about gambling and the dangers of it and make tem understand the diffenence between that and an arcade game.

One last thing, the last time I was at Chuck E. Cheese every game gave you 6 tickets right after you put the token in, so your score and skill didn't matter you still got 6 tickets. So the argument that it is gambling because you have a chance of getting alot or nothing from these machines, at least in the case of Chuck E. Cheese is false.

[TonyTheTiger]

The problem is just when does it stop? The whole Pokemon stuff might have a rare card argument, which I've heard before, is similar to saying that we should stop selling all baseball cards because if they get an Alex Rodriguez that is worth more than they paid for the pack of cards, it could be gambling. There is most definitely no skill in buying a pack of cards, right?

The argument isn't to remove Pokemon or baseball cards from store shelves. There can still be rare cards but the argument is to remove the chance aspect by making it clear which cards are in which packs.

I'm not sure what to think about that. Yeah, part of the fun of opening a pack was seeing what you got. On the other hand, it was always a bitch and a half when you got nothing but doubles. As a kid, I probably would have actually liked to know what was inside before paying for it.


Teach your kids about gambling and the dangers of it and make tem understand the diffenence between that and an arcade game.

But there isn't a difference. Paying for a chance to win = gambling, whether it's for money or redemption tickets.

That's why it's worth bringing up at the very least. Because if you think about it, it is pretty flimsy to say "gambling is illegal for anybody under 18...unless they stand to win anything except money." It may not be highly destructive but that doesn't make it any less flimsy. What's so special about money as a reward that makes it off limits while everything else is just fine?

Hell, flip it around and you could argue that if playing for tickets or tokens is ok then so is playing for cash. No age limits in casinos?

I'm not saying that going to Chuck E. Cheese will turn kids into compulsive gamblers. What I'm saying is that the widespread belief that kids are not allowed to gamble is flat out false.

[alec006]

Really lady, Chuckie Cheese has been around since what the early 80's and no one else has complained about this ever. I'm sorry but people are getting a bit too ridiculous when it comes to stupid shit like this. I mean it's like Nintendo taking the slot machine game corner out of the Pokemon games, I mean, I grew up with those games and it never wanted to make me gamble. America is becoming a nation of whining parents that want everything "Child Friendly." It's your job as a parent to teach your kids that gambling is stupid and if the kid grows up and wants to gamble, it's their own damn choice.

[goatdan]

The argument isn't to remove Pokemon or baseball cards from store shelves. There can still be rare cards but the argument is to remove the chance aspect by making it clear which cards are in which packs.

I'm not sure what to think about that. Yeah, part of the fun of opening a pack was seeing what you got. On the other hand, it was always a bitch and a half when you got nothing but doubles. As a kid, I probably would have actually liked to know what was inside before paying for it.

What would the point be then in having rare or chase cards? Oh, I want this super rare card, so I'll just go through all the packs until I find that card. Then, all the rest of these packs will just sit here.

All that would happen is that the super rare cards would become common, and the rest of the cards would be garbage. Sure, as a kid you might not have liked getting a pack of cards that had a bunch of doubles in it, but I also know that back as a kid (and still today), they sell whole sets of cards MUCH cheaper than what it would cost to buy them as packs and assemble a set. As a for instance, I saw some cards at Target not too long ago, the 700+ set was $50, the packs for 10 cards were $2.99. So, you could purchase the entire thing for $50, or you could get about 170 cards for the same price.


But there isn't a difference. Paying for a chance to win = gambling, whether it's for money or redemption tickets.

It's how you define both chance and win. As for chance, again -- there is an aspect of skill to all those games. There are not any redemption titles that operate like slot machines do -- where you simply put in a coin, press a button and hope for the best. All of the redemption games have some sort of skill to them.

For cards, you're paying for cards. If you get a card that just so happens to be worth more, it isn't defined by the company that was selling them that way, it is defined that way by you or other people. Again, this isn't like a lottery where you are taking a ticket defined by the state, looking at it and determining that it is a winner, as defined again by the state.

If everyone today decided that the Randy Wolf baseball card was going to be the best baseball card to get from some set, it would suddenly be the best. Doesn't matter if you don't know who Randy Wolf is -- the aftermarket determines that.

[InsaneDavid]

Are you sure she's not talking about this place instead? - http://www.chuckycheeze.com.mx/

ROFL There used to be a commercial for it on YouTube years ago but it seems to have been removed... shame.

EDIT: FOUND IT! http://www.mytopclip.com/play.php?vid=17870

[leatherrebel5150]

The argument isn't to remove Pokemon or baseball cards from store shelves. There can still be rare cards but the argument is to remove the chance aspect by making it clear which cards are in which packs.

I'm not sure what to think about that. Yeah, part of the fun of opening a pack was seeing what you got. On the other hand, it was always a bitch and a half when you got nothing but doubles. As a kid, I probably would have actually liked to know what was inside before paying for it.



But there isn't a difference. Paying for a chance to win = gambling, whether it's for money or redemption tickets.

That's why it's worth bringing up at the very least. Because if you think about it, it is pretty flimsy to say "gambling is illegal for anybody under 18...unless they stand to win anything except money." It may not be highly destructive but that doesn't make it any less flimsy. What's so special about money as a reward that makes it off limits while everything else is just fine?

Hell, flip it around and you could argue that if playing for tickets or tokens is ok then so is playing for cash. No age limits in casinos?

I'm not saying that going to Chuck E. Cheese will turn kids into compulsive gamblers. What I'm saying is that the widespread belief that kids are not allowed to gamble is flat out false.

So basically what I'm getting from you is that you have a fear of possible risk.

No risk = No reward


Really lady, Chuckie Cheese has been around since what the early 80's and no one else has complained about this ever. I'm sorry but people are getting a bit too ridiculous when it comes to stupid shit like this. I mean it's like Nintendo taking the slot machine game corner out of the Pokemon games, I mean, I grew up with those games and it never wanted to make me gamble. America is becoming a nation of whining parents that want everything "Child Friendly." It's your job as a parent to teach your kids that gambling is stupid and if the kid grows up and wants to gamble, it's their own damn choice.

YES!!!

[TonyTheTiger]

All of the redemption games have some sort of skill to them.

That's not entirely true. You know those machines where you put in a quarter and out pops a plastic egg or some capsule that has a random prize inside? Well, while you're guaranteed to get a prize, you aren't necessarily guaranteed to get the prize you wanted.


So basically what I'm getting from you is that you have a fear of possible risk.

My own aversion? Not especially. I play the ponies once in a while and have poker parties just like many other red blooded Americans. And I've been playing poker long before I was 18.

But let's not pretend that what goes on in Boardwalk arcades and Las Vegas casinos are worlds apart. If you want to justify the kid games as "whatever, it's not hurting anybody" go right ahead. I keep saying that I don't think it's woefully destructive. But don't try to justify it by saying it's not gambling.

The line we draw that makes it ok for kids to play for redemption tickets (a limited form of currency themselves) and makes it not ok for kids to play for U.S. currency is fairly arbitrary. I'm not necessarily advocating outlawing boardwalk arcades. Nor am I necessarily advocating granting minors full access to Atlantic City casinos. But I am pointing out that the difference between the two is very small. Maybe the small difference is enough to justify drawing that line. But I don't know.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Are you sure she's not talking about this place instead? - http://www.chuckycheeze.com.mx/

ROFL There used to be a commercial for it on YouTube years ago but it seems to have been removed... shame.

EDIT: FOUND IT! http://www.mytopclip.com/play.php?vid=17870

Reminds me of Roybertitos!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JW133F0AK4

[goatdan]

That's not entirely true. You know those machines where you put in a quarter and out pops a plastic egg or some capsule that has a random prize inside? Well, while you're guaranteed to get a prize, you aren't necessarily guaranteed to get the prize you wanted.

Those aren't classified as redemption machines. And are we seriously going to get to the overprotective state where we decide those are 'too much'?

Now, I gotta go. I hear they just put a new gold egg in the chicken machine down the street, and I just found a quarter... can't stay here any longer...

[TonyTheTiger]

If you'd prefer, I've seen gumball machines where you're not guaranteed to get a gumball.

It actually pissed me off and I was a legal adult at the time fully unaware there was a gimmick involved. I can't remember where it was but I put a quarter in, the gumball went through this wild Rube Goldberg machine and I actually never got the gumball. It seemed like it would only get the gumball to you part of the time.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

TonyTheTiger,

I'm still stuck on the point that at some level, don't all states differentiate gambling for money against all other forms of "chance/skill" games.

Isn't that the way it is on the books? And if it isn't why is it that these non-cash-payout redemption games have been able to be owned/operated in any establishment that's properly zoned for them for the past who knows how many years?

Do we know for sure that the laws in California categorize "chance" games like redemption/prize machines in the same category as a slot machine or video poker machine that would pay out in cash?

And if the laws in California don't strictly put the redemption slots in the same category as the cash slots you'd find in Las Vegas doesn't this have a very high possibility of being thrown out of court as ultimately merit-less?

[skaar]

I like to think that kids would learn a valuable lesson from those machines.

Like how not to waste their money.

The first time a redemption machine ripped me off when I was a kid that was all it took for me.

[TonyTheTiger]

The case is probably not going to get too far for just that reason, Frankie. What I was addressing is that the tone of the thread seemed to go immediately against any and all talk about redemption games being related to gambling. I just wanted to show they're not exactly unlike each other, and in some cases are pretty much indistinguishable from a logical angle, not necessarily a legal one.

Each state does have it's own gambling laws and if they allow it always zone for it. My understanding was always that paying to win money vs. paying to win anything else is where the line was drawn and how laws usually work. Now I could be wrong about that. Especially for California which tends to be weirder compared to the rest of the country. I haven't looked up statutes or anything.

But even disregarding the law, I think it's pretty common to view playing for cash as an "adult" activity separate from whatever kids can play for. Common use of the term "gambling" in that sense would limit it to the likes of Las Vegas and not apply to the boardwalk. Connotation vs. Denotation. So despite the technical similarity, the popular distinction is likely too strong for much of anything to come out of this.

Now if something crazy happens and everybody starts labeling those ticket machines as gambling, too? Then we might see something. But, honestly, I doubt it. In spite of my comparisons, I genuinely don't see a huge issue. Yeah, we technically allow kids to gamble. We pretend it's different. Ok. Maybe shame on us. But I think we're so accepting of the current standard that few people will rally for change.

[Icarus Moonsight]

I think Tony is correct, the distinctions are mostly arbitrary, but that's the system for ya. Money is stuff technically, it's the representation of stuff in unit form. So, if the only difference between gambling and not is risking money to get money or risking money to get stuff... It boils down to, "12 of this or a dozen of that".

[Clownzilla]

If a game machine has skill solely involved in the winning process then it's not gambling. Crane machines fall into this category. Even though the crane grip is loose and the stuffed animals are packed tightly you technically will always able to pick something up. Very few people are that "skilled" but if the crane reaches the toys and the arm closes then TECHNICALLY you can pick up a toy every time. Many factors are involved (size of toys, pressure toys have on each other, size of craze, etc.) but it's all there for you to see.

TIcket redemption machines are out because you always win a prize (even if it's 1 ticket). Believe it or not games like the light cube stacking game are not rigged either. Yes, the blocks seem to jump over a space when a button is pressed but technically there is a definable moment of time (in the exact center) where you can press the button and it stays. This moment can be seen in a pattern and can be seen IF you have the mental skill of a Steven Hawking and the reflexes of some Karate expert.

Gambling is when you can't possibly predict the outcome of the game. Slot machines run a random number generator 24-7 and the generator (yes,even high end RNG's are not completely random but are random enough to be realistically considered random) is stopped at the point of the lever pull or button press. Everything after that has already been determined. Even the bonus games where you stop a wheel or pick the correct box have already been decided for you. Card games, craps, roulette, etc. are all random because you never know what is coming up next. Even counting cards in blackjack can't assure you what is coming up in the next hand. It only can improve the odds of you guessing what is coming next. Poker is the only game that has been debated on because you are playing against others and their psychology. Good poker players routinely win over and over because they get good a predicting the actions of others.

Realistically, arcade redemption machines are all luck because there is no way even the smartest gamer can crack the patterns and have the reflexes. Legally though, those patterns CAN be seen and that is how they can get by with putting them in arcades.

[TonyTheTiger]

If a game machine has skill solely involved in the winning process then it's not gambling. Crane machines fall into this category. Even though the crane grip is loose and the stuffed animals are packed tightly you technically will always able to pick something up. Very few people are that "skilled" but if the crane reaches the toys and the arm closes then TECHNICALLY you can pick up a toy every time. Many factors are involved (size of toys, pressure toys have on each other, size of craze, etc.) but it's all there for you to see.

TIcket redemption machines are out because you always win a prize (even if it's 1 ticket). Believe it or not games like the light cube stacking game are not rigged either. Yes, the blocks seem to jump over a space when a button is pressed but technically there is a definable moment of time (in the exact center) where you can press the button and it stays. This moment can be seen in a pattern and can be seen IF you have the mental skill of a Steven Hawking and the reflexes of some Karate expert.

Gambling is when you can't possibly predict the outcome of the game. Slot machines run a random number generator 24-7 and the generator (yes,even high end RNG's are not completely random but are random enough to be realistically considered random) is stopped at the point of the lever pull or button press. Everything after that has already been determined. Even the bonus games where you stop a wheel or pick the correct box have already been decided for you. Card games, craps, roulette, etc. are all random because you never know what is coming up next. Even counting cards in blackjack can't assure you what is coming up in the next hand. It only can improve the odds of you guessing what is coming next. Poker is the only game that has been debated on because you are playing against others and their psychology. Good poker players routinely win over and over because they get good a predicting the actions of others.

Realistically, arcade redemption machines are all luck because there is no way even the smartest gamer can crack the patterns and have the reflexes. Legally though, those patterns CAN be seen and that is how they can get by with putting them in arcades.

What about those big wheel games on the boardwalk? You know the ones. The whole counter is a big board where you put your money on whatever number/letter/shape/etc you want. Those symbols match sections on the wheel. Then the big wheel starts spinning and if it lands on your pick you win a prize. That's literally roulette for kids. It's the exact same game. Some even have odds, where if you play a smaller section you win bigger.

http://guillotinepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/boardwalk-wheel-e1300236392728.jpg

I don't have any problem with this at all. I enjoyed those games as much as any other kid. Hell, I still enjoy them when I go. But it's gambling.

So if somebody is going to take the hard lined stance that "kids shouldn't gamble" then it's pretty much a requirement they be against these kinds of games. Likewise, if, like me, you don't have a problem with it, then you have to admit you don't have a problem with kids gambling under certain circumstances.

Again, maybe the money thing really does matter. Maybe dealing with winning actual cash somehow requires a greater level of maturity as opposed to winning candy, stuffed animals, or even electronics. So maybe it's perfectly fine to draw the line where it is. But that still doesn't mean one is gambling and the other isn't. It's still all gambling. It just means one element of gambling is ok for kids while another isn't.

[dgdgagdae]

I hope we all realize that the only reason we're having this discussion is because some greedy parent wants $5 million dollars for nothing. That's what this is all about.

The problem is greed, not gambling.

[leatherrebel5150]

Is there not a hint of irony in this case? This lady is taking a chance on suing Chuck E. Cheese on the CHANCE that she will get some money from it, so in essence she herself is guilty of gambling.

So my verdict is she is setting the bad example for her kids by taking a "gamble" to win money, not Chuck E. Cheese.

[kedawa]

If playing a redemption game is gambling, then so is playing an arcade game that has randomness, since you have the chance of winning more play time (which is a clearly monetized service since you pay for the privilege of playing) by being lucky. Same goes for winning free games of pinball by matching after last ball.

[APE992]

Ya know when I was in elementary school many moons ago there were always a few parents of classmates that had a problem with having raffles. You know, buy a ticket, if your number gets pulled you win? Simple.

Apparently the only ones with the problem were particularly strict with their religious beliefs. I don't recall offhand what religious sect they belonged to but gambling was a huge no-no for them like adultery is, probably on the same level even.

I wouldn't be surprised if this lady had the same religious convictions which she is free to have. But suing for several million dollars? I hope the judge slaps her with fines for a frivolous suit.

[kedawa]

She can't be fined for bringing legal action against CEC, but if she loses, she's on the hook for court fees and whatever her lawyers bill her.

[calistarwind]

When I was young I would go play Bingo with the neighbor lady down the street. You would go in and give them $5 to buy a card (which you would get to choose) and it was all chance. I won $150 and you can guess who wanted to go back next week. My mom was not thrilled with this and explained to me about chances. What my mom did not do is run down to the college and threaten to sue them. Bingo is still a legal game and is just a paper form of gambling but no one sees it as being harmful. It makes old ladies happy.

[Yago]

This is right up there with the lady that sued McDonalds because the coffee was too hot. Seriously... I had a lot of fun playing these games as a kid. So why is it an issue now eons later? Kids don't even really know what gambling and slot machines are that are playing these games. All becuase one ignorant woman (Dennis Keller) is having a mid life chrisis. Poor Dennis, we're in a recession and the housing market is awful. She's a real estate agent and can't sell a home or make any money. So lets run out and try to sue somebody. I'm going to sue Mrs. Keller for being so stupid.