High 5’s Dismissal Motion Denied in Ongoing Sweepstakes Casino Dispute
Last Thursday, a San Francisco County Superior Court denied High 5’s motion to file a civil complaint that concerns the legality of the sweepstakes casino in the state. Now, the case will proceed.
LISTEN TO THIS ARTICLE:While High 5 didn’t succeed with its dismissal motion, the sweepstakes casino operator filed a separate motion to move the case toward arbitration. However, that remains unresolved.
In past sweepstakes casino-related lawsuits, they’ve been sent to arbitration. For example, in May, a lawsuit filed by plaintiff Dennis Boyle against Stake.us in February was sent to arbitration. This is because user agreements at sweepstakes casinos have arbitration clauses embedded within them to avoid full-on trials.
Super Court Denies Dismissal
In this case, Judge Christine Van Aken found that the plaintiff, Thomas Portugal, had standing under California’s Unfair Competition Law. Van Aken rejected High 5’s claim that Portugal didn’t have standing. Also, the court made it clear that the factual allegation presented by Portugal was accepted as true thus far.
The decision by Van Aken doesn’t necessarily address the merits of the case, but rather that High 5’s attempt at dismissal failed.
Portugal filed its complaint in January. It alleges that High 5 Casino operators are an illegal gambling site in California, which offers sweepstakes-style games. Now we wait on the arbitration motion.
More Regulation News
Examining High 5’s Terms and Conditions
Under the terms and conditions at High 5 Casino, it has a section which reads: “arbitration means [that] you will not be able to seek damages in court or present your case to a jury” and “the parties shall use their best efforts to settle any dispute, claim, question, or disagreement and engage in good faith negotiations which shall be a pre-condition to either party initiating a formal arbitration as provided in Section 16. If the parties do not reach an agreed-upon solution within a period of thirty (30) days from the time of the initial Notice, then either party may initiate binding arbitration, to the extent permitted by law, as the sole means to resolve claims…”.
As you can see in those terms, there’s a 30-day negotiation period, and the players waive their rights to sue in court.
However, we have seen recently that sweepstakes casinos in California, such as Modo.us, have added legal waivers that players must confirm before playing, something not available at High 5.
RELATED TOPICS: Regulation
Latest News
Casinos & Games
Review this New Post
Leave a Comment
User Comments
Comments for High 5’s Dismissal Motion Denied in Ongoing Sweepstakes Casino Dispute