Plaintiffs, card players, sought review of an order entered by the Superior Court of Los Angeles County

Procedural Posture

Plaintiffs, card players, sought review of an order entered by the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California), which granted summary judgment in favor of defendants, card playing facility and manager. Plaintiffs contended that their substantial losses in card games were the result of defendants' breach of an implied contract to provide security, and breach of the covenants of good faith and fair dealing, to prevent cheating.

Overview

After plaintiffs, card player, sustained substantial losses from card playing, they filed a lawsuit against defendants, card playing facility and manger, claiming defendants breached their implied contract to provide security and investigate cheating, and breached the covenants of good faith and fair dealing. The court affirmed summary judgment for defendants. The court held that, as a matter of law, plaintiffs failed to prove that their damages were reasonably certain and proximately caused by defendants' alleged contract breach. The court found that card playing, like horse racing, had unpredictable outcomes. The court stated that plaintiffs' damages were based on their speculation that the outcome of the games would have been more favorable to them, but for the alleged cheating. The court also affirmed the dismissal of plaintiffs' conversion, civil conspiracy, litigation attorney and negligence claims for the reason that the damages were speculative, and not proximately caused by any of defendants' actions.

Outcome

The court affirmed summary judgment for defendants, card playing facility and manager. The court held that, as a matter of law, plaintiffs, card players, failed to prove that their damages were reasonably certain and proximately caused by defendants' alleged actions or inactions.