← All case studies · Ken Uston biography
Court case · 1979–1982
The dispute concerned who could exclude a player, rather than whether the player could predict every card.
What happened
Resorts excluded Uston on 30 January 1979 because he counted cards. On 5 May 1982, the New Jersey Supreme Court addressed that exclusion in a regulated casino environment. The opinion placed the question within the Casino Control Commission’s authority and the rules governing the game.
The case illustrates an important distinction: a method can change expected results without breaking the mechanical rules of blackjack, while access to the premises remains a separate issue. The decision depended on New Jersey’s framework and the facts before the court.
What the case teaches
Think of a proposed session as three gates: the game must offer the assumed rules, the player must be allowed to enter and remain, and the information must remain available long enough to matter. Passing the mathematical gate does not automatically pass the other two. This framework explains why a strategy description alone cannot tell you whether a session can actually take place.
Did the case make card counters welcome everywhere?
No. Its reasoning belongs to a particular jurisdiction and regulatory setting. Other venues and jurisdictions can operate under different rules.
Explore the next question
Sources
Source pages checked 5 October 2026. Historical results refer to the dates stated; examples marked hypothetical are Casino101 calculations.
