Does a gambling establishment violate the California Anti-Gambling Act by denying access to the premises to a customer who has dishonored checks and is known as a compulsive gambler?

Gambling establishments do not violate the Act by denying a customer access to the premises when the customer had dishonored checks and was known as a compulsive gambler. (Wynn v. Monterey Club (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 789, 168 Cal.Rptr. 878.) The Wynn court found the business practice was not arbitrary because it involved good business and social practice based on positive public policy. "This case involves gambling establishments and not some form of harmless entertainment. Plaintiff has a strong and protectable interest in the preservation of the marriage and the emotional well-being of himself and his wife. The wife suffers from a recognized mental disorder and has overtly manifested her propensities. The contract was an attempt by lawful means to prevent harm to both spouses and the marriage itself. It did not violate the public policy which seeks to preserve to all persons freedom of action and choice." (Id., 111 Cal.App.3d at pp. 798-799, 168 Cal.Rptr. 878.)