I don’t understand how his business model works. People who are drunk cannot engage in a contract. So, even if these women signed a waiver, it should not survive a challenge. If they were inebriated, there is no contract. Someone who is creating residence of destroying contract law, is hurting all business.
Yes, I am troubled by what those young girls have gotten themselves into, especially under the influence of alcohol or other mood enhancers. But I was also speaking of other women he has come in contact with:
http://www.latimes.com/features/la-tm-gonewild32aug06,0,4420998,full.story
If you put yourself in a drunken state voluntarily I see no problem with a contract standing. Some people can be legally drunk but straight headed and do sound work and thinking, and some people can be out of it and not legally be drunk. Prove “drunk” without blood test or breathalyzer. People can act drunk and not be drunk.
Now if someone drugs you against your will or unknowingly makes a person drunk or high and gets them to sign a contract, that contract should not stand.
“People who are drunk cannot engage in a contract.”
I don’t condone anything that Joe Francis has done, but just to throw this out: I wonder how many drunk losing gamblers this casino owner has refused?