The case Las Vegas Sands v. Nehme on page 383-384 of your textbook deals with the creation of a negotiable instrument. The court decided that in that case, the casino marker for $500,000 created met all of the requirements for a negotiableinstrument. A negotiable instrument is a type of formal contract which because it meets those requirements can be "negotiated" or passed from one owner to the next to transfer a financial obligation much like a check. Mr. Nehme signed it acknowledging a debt to the casino but did not have enough money in the Bank of America to cover the check. In this discussion I would like you not to talk about whether or not you agree with the court's decision in the case but whether or not casinos should be allowed to used markers, that are actually contracts when lending money to gamblers in their casinos. In your original post, please respond to the following questions:

1. If you have ever been to a casino, you know that gambling and drinking alcoholic beverages go together. Often casinos offer free drinks to their best customers. Why does this form a problem with the ability to enter into a contract? Explain in your answer one of the four required elements of a valid contract.

2. Should casinos be allowed to offer negotiable contracts to their customers? What would the effect be on their business if suddenly became illegal to do so?

3. What do you think the Nevada legislature could do to keep casinos from taking advantage of intoxicated gamblers without destroying the hotel and casino industry? Explain.