Jury awards $110,000 for forcible backrooming of card counter A Clark County District Court jury on Wednesday awarded $110,000 to a card counter who was forcibly backroomed and held against his will by security guards at the New Frontier casino in Las Vegas several years ago. The unanimous verdict was for $10,000 more than the plaintiff had asked for. The plaintiff was represented by prominent local attorneys Robert Nersesian and Thea Sankiewicz. After a three-day trial, the jury deliberated less than an hour, finding the New Frontier, an individual security guard and the chief of security liable for false imprisonment, assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The jury also found the New Frontier liable for negligent hiring and training of its security staff. Testimony revealed that the chief of security, who had created the policy of forcible backrooming of legally-playing card counters, had little or no training or education in matters pertaining to false imprisonment. Testimony further revealed that the guards received virtually no training at all, and are not even given a manual to read, though a manual is kept in the office of the chief of security. The surveillance video of the incident was compelling evidence. It showed the card counter peacefully attempting to leave the premises; the guards subsequently forcing him into a back room and forcing him to submit to a search of his possessions. In the back room, the chief of security was heard repeatedly shouting epithets at the victim, and was seen physically placing the victim against the wall for a search of his pockets, which was conducted by the guard. The victim was forcibly held against his will for a period of approximately eight minutes. The New Frontiers only defenses were that the plaintiff "did not suffer any damages," and that Metro police had instructed the security chief to handle routine trespass warnings in this manner. No testimony or evidence from Metro was presented to substantiate the allegation. Prior to the case going to the jury, the trial judge inexplicably threw out the plaintiff's request for punitive damages, not permitting the jury to consider punitive damages. Another case is pending against the New Frontier for similar actions against another patron, and is scheduled to go to trial early next year.
