Federal judge: Poker a game of skill, not chance
Ending an age-old debate, a federal judge ruled last week that poker is primarily a game of skill, not chance, tossing out the conviction of a N.Y. man previously found guilty of violating the Illegal Gambling Business Act.
August 28, 2012 at 08:27 AM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Ending an age-old debate, a federal judge ruled last week that poker is primarily a game of skill, not chance, tossing out the conviction of a N.Y. man previously found guilty of violating the Illegal Gambling Business Act.
In July 2011, a jury found that businessman Lawrence DiCristina ran afoul the federal law by running semiweekly poker games out of one of his warehouses, which players paid $300 to join. DiCristina faced a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, but his lawyers appealed the conviction, arguing that poker was a game of skill, and thus not prohibited by the statute.
U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein evidently agreed, vacating DiCristina's conviction last week. In his 120-page ruling, Weinstein noted that, although New York state courts have long ruled that poker constitutes gambling, federal law on the issue is unclear. He thus applied the rule of lenity, which favors the defendant when a statute is ambiguous.
Weinstein also relied on expert testimony and research suggesting that skilled poker players consistently defeat unskilled players. “Bluffing, raising and folding require honed skills to maximize the value of the cards dealt by Lady Luck,” he wrote.
The ruling also places other games along the skill-chance spectrum, including chess, which Weinstein calls “a pure game of skill”; bridge, golf and poker, which require more skill than chance; sports betting, blackjack and craps, which depend more on chance than skill; and slot machines, roulette, baccarat and lotteries, games of pure or nearly pure chance.
Read the full story at the Wall Street Journal.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of poker, see:
Ending an age-old debate, a federal judge ruled last week that poker is primarily a game of skill, not chance, tossing out the conviction of a N.Y. man previously found guilty of violating the Illegal Gambling Business Act.
In July 2011, a jury found that businessman Lawrence DiCristina ran afoul the federal law by running semiweekly poker games out of one of his warehouses, which players paid $300 to join. DiCristina faced a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, but his lawyers appealed the conviction, arguing that poker was a game of skill, and thus not prohibited by the statute.
U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein evidently agreed, vacating DiCristina's conviction last week. In his 120-page ruling, Weinstein noted that, although
Weinstein also relied on expert testimony and research suggesting that skilled poker players consistently defeat unskilled players. “Bluffing, raising and folding require honed skills to maximize the value of the cards dealt by Lady Luck,” he wrote.
The ruling also places other games along the skill-chance spectrum, including chess, which Weinstein calls “a pure game of skill”; bridge, golf and poker, which require more skill than chance; sports betting, blackjack and craps, which depend more on chance than skill; and slot machines, roulette, baccarat and lotteries, games of pure or nearly pure chance.
Read the full story at the Wall Street Journal.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of poker, see:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSenators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anticompetitive Practices, Fees
Trump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
Trump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readFTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250