Skip to the text

Courts & Cases

Filed · Last reviewed

What courts and tribunals have actually decided about gambling disputes — with the docket number, the instance and the date behind every line.

We revise a page when the statute, filing or report behind it changes: if the source is not in front of us, the figure does not go up.

5 in this desk

SELF-EXCLUSION LIST

Courts & Cases

They Let Me In After I Self-Excluded: What Remedies Exist

California’s self-exclusion program says it plainly: an active self-excluded patron who walks onto the floor must be removed, the Bureau notified, and any unredeemed jackpots or prizes confiscated.

Filed

MALFUNCTION VOIDS ALL PAYS

Courts & Cases

The Jackpot That Was a Malfunction: What Courts Have Decided

In McKee v. Isle of Capri Casinos, Inc., a penny slot displayed a bonus award of $41,797,550.16. The Iowa Supreme Court held that the patron was entitled to just $1.85, because the game’s approved rules—not the flashing screen—formed the contract between the player and the casino.

Filed

Courts & Cases

3 Iconic Legal Battles Between Gamblers and Casinos

Gamblers and casinos don’t always agree on the outcome of games. These disagreements have led to some high-profile court cases, where players have sued casinos to collect winnings or vice versa.

Filed

The Hazard Docket deskGambling law, money and play

This page is written and kept up to date by the desk. Before anything goes up we check three things: that every figure carries the filing, statute or report that fixes it; that every date carries the document it comes from; and that every procedure is described the way the body that runs it describes it. We do not rate operators, we are not paid to list anyone, and where we have no source the field stays empty and we say so.

Last reviewed · Corrections and source requests: [email protected] · How we work