Nevada Supreme Court upholds Caesars Entertainment’s right to bar doctor from premises

CARSON CITY — A doctor who sued Caesars Entertainment Corp. when it barred him from its properties and prevented him from attending a medical conference at Paris Las Vegas lost his appeal Thursday to the Nevada Supreme Court.

Justices, in a 4-3 opinion, upheld the dismissal of Dr. Joel Slade’s civil complaint by a lower court judge, ruling that “gaming establishments generally have the right to exclude any person from their premises,” even when they are acting as an innkeeper, provided the reason is not discriminatory or unlawful.

Slade was evicted from Harrah’s Tunica Hotel in Mississippi in 2011 for an undisclosed reason. He was informed the eviction would be enforced at all properties owned, operated or managed by Caesars, a Nevada-based company.

According to documents, Slade later contacted Caesars about attending a medical conference but was told the eviction would be enforced at Paris Las Vegas.

Slade sued, claiming the hotel had a duty as an innkeeper under common law to allow him reasonable access.

District Judge Allan Earl dismissed the case, prompting the appeal to the high court.

Justice James Hardesty, writing for the majority, said gaming establishments encompass the entirety of premises where gaming is done, not just casino areas.

Parsing out different areas of a gaming establishment’s premises to determine if a reason must be given to exclude someone “would create an inconsistent application” because of the many ways hotel-casinos are configured, the majority said.

Because Slade failed to assert his exclusion from the Paris was for an unlawful reason, the court said the lower court’s dismissal of the case was proper.

Justices Kristina Pickering, Michael Douglas and Michael Cherry dissented, arguing the case should be remanded to District Court for more fact finding.

“Without more than the bare allegations in Slade’s complaint … I cannot reconcile an absolute right to exclude for any reason or no reason at all to the entire premises of a hotel-casino with the common-law duty of innkeepers, which only allows exclusion for good cause,” Pickering wrote.

In a separate dissent, Cherry stressed the reason for Slade’s exclusion from the property is crucial and the majority opinion bars further probing.

Contact Sandra Chereb at schereb@reviewjournal.com or 775-461-3821. Find @SandraChereb on Twitter.