Larry Flynt Loses California Casino Gambling Fight2 years ago
Larry Flynt, the poker-playing porn magnate and casino owner, has lost his bid to be allowed to enter the California poker market after a federal judge ‘dismissed with prejudice’ a lawsuit he brought to challenge a California law on organized crime that prevents ownership of out-of-state casinos, according to Courthousenews.com.
Flynt, whose home game is one of the biggest in the world and in which David Oppenheim once lost $1.8million, is the owner of the Hustler Casino and Larry Flynt’s Luck Lady Casino in Southern California, and claimed that an ‘outdated state law’ had prevented him from ‘investing in lucrative casino opportunities in 2014 and 2015’.
U.S. District Judge John Mendez, however, found in his written judgment that Flynn’s claims ‘fell outside a two-year statute of limitations’.
The legal battle revolved around the The Gambling Registration Act, which courtroom news described as being ‘enacted to keep the mob out of California gambling operations by limiting cardroom operators’ financial resources’.
In effect, the legislation prevented what amounted to reciprocal investments - residents with California gaming licenses being unable to invest in ‘out-of-state casinos’, with ‘out-of-state residents who own gambling businesses’ blocked from holding California cardroom licenses.
Flynt and and the father-and-son co-filers of the legal action, Haig Kelegian Sr. and Jr., argued that ‘the law has outlived its rationale’, adding that ‘the mob’ had been been ‘frozen out of Nevada casinos for decades’ – and therefore there was no need to bar operators on such grounds.
As the legal website stated, the argument ‘centered on California’s fining Kelegian Jr. $210,000 for transferring ownership of an out-of-state casino to his wife’ – and although this was described as a ‘one-time decision’, the effect was to prevent the plaintiffs including Flynt, from investing in other casinos.
Flynt who recently offered $10million to anyone who could dish the dirt on President Trump which would lead to his impeachment - argued in court that he might ‘lose minority holdings in some of his out-of-state adult businesses if they were to add gambling’ due to California business laws enacted back in 1986, and were seeking to ‘find the law unconstitutional’.
Mendez rejected the amended complaint, finding they failed to allege continuing harm.
“The court also finds that any further amendment would be futile and, therefore, grants defendants’ motion to dismiss with prejudice,” Mendez wrote.
California’s gambling laws are among the messiest in the USA, a continuing stumbling block for the granting of online poker legislation for example, and Flynt’s Attorney - Paul Cambria of New York - has said his clients will appeal the recent decision.
Did you like this article?Tweet +0