Mike Postle Cheating Lawsuit: Plaintiffs File Response to Stonesā€™ Denial of Responsibility

3 years ago
Mike Postle Cheating Lawsuit: Plaintiffs File Response to Stonesā€™ Denial of Responsibility
07:55
10 May

Action is heating up in the California lawsuit pitting 88 poker players and alleged cheating victims against Mike Postle, Justin Kuraitis, and Kingā€™s Casino Management, the parent company of Sacramentoā€™s Stones Gambling Hall. On Monday, May 4, 2020, plaintiffsā€™ counsel Maurice ā€œMacā€ VerStandig filed memos of opposition to dismissal motions previously filed by Postleā€™s two co-defendants, Kuraitis and Kingā€™s Casino Management.

The legal heat here is in VerStandigā€™s response to Kingā€™s Casino Management motion, which notoriously proclaimed in that motion, along with several other reasons seeking cause for dismissal, that, ā€œCasinos do not owe a general duty of care to gamblers.ā€ Stonesā€™ defense also included the claim that all the evidence in the case amounts to a massive case of losing poker playersā€™ sour grapes, despite statistical analysis showing Postleā€™s win rates exceeding win rates by multiple orders of magnitude.

VerStandigā€™s response skewered those claims. Not only did VerStandigā€™s response reiterate the analytic nature of the evidence, it castigated Stones (Kingā€™s Casino Management) and itā€™s counsel for ignoring its responsibility to its customers. 

ā€œThe crux of Stonesā€™ Motion is that Plaintiffsā€™ Complaint and the allegations therein can be chalked up to the paradigmatic sob story of gamblers ā€“ sore losers claim they were cheated because they cannot accept the superiority of an adversary,ā€ wrote VerStandig. ā€œTo whittle Plaintiffsā€™ argument down to a disparaging conclusion is not only offensive to Plaintiffs, but, too, to the very gaming community from which Stones draws its customer base.ā€

Stonesā€™ attempt to ignore its corporate and civic responsibilities to its customers has, as reported previously, drawn widespread responsibility across the gambling world. Further, according to VerStandig:

ā€œBoth Stones and Mr. Postle profited off his cheating, and Stones is thusly liable for its own actionable conduct.ā€

Stones profited from the Postle-centered ā€œStones Live!ā€ games in several ways, VerStandigā€™s response noted. Besides rake generated from the webcast cash games themselves, the ā€œStones Live!ā€™ shows were a huge promotional vehicle for the Sacramento poker room.

ā€œStones did this as a means of promoting its relatively new casino, allowing for targeted marketing to card players conveying the atmosphere of a poker ā€˜destinationā€™ā€, VerStandig wrote.

The response also gave VerStandig another opportunity to chastise Stones Gambling Hall for another ongoing lie. Following her shunning by Stones and the ā€œStones Live!ā€ coordinator, Kuraitis, lead defendant Veronica Brill took her cheating accusations public via social media. That led to a firestorm, extensive hand analysis and eventually the lawsuit, yet early on, Stones promised to conduct a thorough investigation into the cheating allegations and make those findings public, the latter of which, at least, remains undone. In addition, the supposed ā€œindependentā€ investigator leading the investigation turned out to be the personal counsel of one of Stonesā€™ primary owners.

VerStandig had no additional response to the filing of the responses, except for a touch of snark on Twitter:


Articles 74

Veteran poker and gambling writer/editor Haley Hintze has provided content throughout the gambling world for nearly 20 years. Widely known for her work on online poker's insider-cheating scandals in the late 2000s, she's been a two-time Global Poker Awards finalist and a prior finalist for Women in ...Read more

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a new comment

No Comments found.