Hakimoglu v. Trump Taj Mahal Associates

Ayhan Hakimoglu played his hand, and lost. Now we are being asked to make our own bet. Sitting in diversity, we must predict how the highest court of New Jersey would rule. See Robertson v. Allied Signal, Inc., 914 F.2d 360, 378 (3d Cir.1990). As the majority points out, we must make this prediction with little guidance from New Jersey law. But that is an incident — and a flaw — of the regime of diversity jurisdiction. I believe that the New Jersey Supreme Court would recognize a cause of action, in tort, allowing patrons to recover gambling debts from casinos that serve them alcohol after…