This site is a developmental version of Wiki Law School. To go to the production site: www.wikilawschool.org
Gottlieb v. Tropicana Casino: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
No edit summary |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "|case_treatment=No " to "") |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Infobox Case Brief | {{Infobox Case Brief | ||
|court=United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania | |court=United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania | ||
|date= | |date=2000-7-5 | ||
|subject=Contracts | |subject=Contracts | ||
|facts=The [https://www.caesars.com/tropicana-ac Tropicana Hotel and Casino] in Atlantic City, New Jersey, offered a free Diamond membership program to patrons who provided their basic personal information. | |facts=The [https://www.caesars.com/tropicana-ac Tropicana Hotel and Casino] in Atlantic City, New Jersey, offered a free Diamond membership program to patrons who provided their basic personal information. | ||
| Line 15: | Line 14: | ||
Tropicana moved for summary judgment because Gottlieb didn't provide '''consideration''' to spin the wheel. | Tropicana moved for summary judgment because Gottlieb didn't provide '''consideration''' to spin the wheel. | ||
|issues=Is a minimal detriment incurred for participation in a promotional contest sufficient consideration to form a contract? | |issues=Is a minimal detriment incurred for participation in a promotional contest sufficient consideration to form a contract? | ||
|holding=Yes. A person who incurs minimal detriment to participate in a promotional contest provides sufficient consideration to form an [[Contract law in the United States|enforceable contract]]. | |||
|case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | |case_text_links={{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://casetext.com/case/gottlieb-v-tropicana-hotel-casino | |link=https://casetext.com/case/gottlieb-v-tropicana-hotel-casino | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | }}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/gottlieb-v-tropicana-hotel-and-casino | |link=https://www.quimbee.com/cases/gottlieb-v-tropicana-hotel-and-casino | ||
|case_text_source=Quimbee | |source_type=Video summary | ||
|case_text_source=Quimbee | |||
}}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | }}{{Infobox Case Brief/Case Text Link | ||
|link=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/109/324/2522826/ | |link=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/109/324/2522826/ | ||
Latest revision as of 03:39, July 14, 2023
| Gottlieb v. Tropicana Casino | |
| Court | United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | 2000-7-5 |
Facts
The Tropicana Hotel and Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey, offered a free Diamond membership program to patrons who provided their basic personal information.
Diamond members were issued identification card to swipe at casino machines. This allowed the casino to offer personal ads to the patrons.
Ms Gottlieb who lived in Pennsylvania became a Tropicana Diamond member to participate in the Funhouse Million Dollar Wheel promotion.
Ms Gottlieb claimed that the wheel landed on the $1 million prize; however, the game attendant immediately re-spun the wheel.Procedural History
Gottlieb sued Tropicana (the casino) for contract breach in federal district court under diversity jurisdiction.
Tropicana moved for summary judgment because Gottlieb didn't provide consideration to spin the wheel.Issues
Is a minimal detriment incurred for participation in a promotional contest sufficient consideration to form a contract?
Holding
Yes. A person who incurs minimal detriment to participate in a promotional contest provides sufficient consideration to form an enforceable contract.
