jili tutorial

Woman Sues Las Vegas Bar Over Injury on Mechanical Penis: A Comprehensive Guide to Liability, Waivers, and Amusement Ride Safety

By jili tutorial · October 5, 2026

Woman Sues Las Vegas Bar Over Injury on Mechanical Penis: A Comprehensive Guide to Liability, Waivers, and Amusement Ride Safety

Overview of the Lawsuit

An Illinois woman, Amber Zabran, has filed a lawsuit against The Nerd, a downtown Las Vegas bar located inside the Neonopolis complex at 450 Fremont Street. The suit, filed September 30, 2025, in Clark County District Court, alleges she was seriously injured after being thrown from a mechanical penis ride during a late‑night visit on November 22, 2025. The complaint claims the bar failed to maintain the attraction, warn patrons of hazards, or require any safety waivers before use.

The lawsuit names Imagine Adventures Las Vegas LLC (doing business as The Nerd), Imagine Adventures Holdings LLC, and Jonathan Borchetta, identified as an owner and operator. The Nerd has not yet responded to requests for comment.

The Attraction and the Incident

The Nerd Bar and Its Novelty Rides

The Nerd is a themed bar inside the Neonopolis complex on Fremont Street, offering arcade games, bowling lanes, and a bull‑ride‑style attraction shaped like a penis. The bar promotes the ride online with the tagline, “Ride it, slide it, stay on top.” A photo on the bar’s website demonstrates the device, which is operated by an employee using a joystick and control panel.

What Happened on November 22, 2025

According to the filing, Zabran visited The Nerd with friends shortly before closing time. After paying for a turn on the mechanical ride, she was not asked to sign a waiver or release and received no verbal safety instructions—despite the bar’s website currently stating that “a waiver is required to be signed prior to riding.”

The ride began with slow circular movements and then sped up. During operation, Zabran’s foot or ankle allegedly slipped into a cut‑out section beneath the main shaft of the device. She was then thrown from the seat, resulting in injuries. The complaint describes “great pain of body and mind,” including serious and painful physical injuries, shock, injury to her nervous system, mental stress, anxiety, and anguish. Some injuries may be permanent.

Negligence and Failure to Maintain

The lawsuit argues the ride was defective, improperly supervised, and operated in a manner that increased the likelihood of a fall. It also claims employees failed to disclose risks or warn patrons that the attraction could cause injury. Key allegations include:

Vicarious Liability and Negligent Hiring

The suit also includes claims of vicarious liability, meaning the bar is responsible for the actions of its employees during the course of their work. Additionally, negligent hiring, retention, and supervision are alleged—implying that the bar knew or should have known that its staff or ride operation procedures posed a risk to patrons.

Res Ipsa Loquitur: “The Thing Speaks for Itself”

One notable legal doctrine invoked is res ipsa loquitur, which allows a plaintiff to rely on circumstantial evidence when the cause of an accident is under the defendant’s control. In simple terms: if the ride would not normally cause injury without negligence, and the bar had exclusive control over its operation, then negligence can be inferred even without direct proof of a specific error. This is often used in slip‑and‑fall or product‑liability cases where the exact malfunction is unclear.

Waivers and Safety: What Bar Owners and Patrons Should Know

The Role of Liability Waivers in Nevada

In Nevada, waivers are generally enforceable but must be clear, conspicuous, and signed voluntarily. If a bar advertises that a waiver is required but fails to obtain one, that omission can be strong evidence of negligence. In this case, The Nerd’s website states “a waiver is required to be signed prior to riding,” yet Zabran alleges she was never asked to sign one. This discrepancy could undermine the bar’s defense.

Examples of Similar Cases

What Patrons Should Do Before Riding

Damages Sought and Financial Context

Zabran seeks damages for:

The specific total amount is not disclosed, but the request for each element “in excess of $15,000” is a standard pleading threshold to ensure the case falls within the jurisdiction of the district court.

Broader Implications for Bars with Novelty Rides

This lawsuit highlights critical risk‑management issues for venues offering amusement attractions:

If The Nerd is found liable, it may set a precedent for how Nevada courts treat novelty rides in bars—especially when the attraction’s design (like the cut‑out section) creates an obvious hazard.

Conclusion

The case of Zabran v. Imagine Adventures Las Vegas LLC is ongoing, with no court date yet set. It serves as a cautionary tale for both bar owners and patrons: even a playful ride can lead to serious injuries, and the absence of safety precautions can turn a fun night into a costly legal battle.

As the industry continues to blur the lines between nightlife and amusement park experiences, proper risk management is no longer optional—it is a legal necessity.