Gossip Column: Stones Gambling Hall Files 2nd Motion Seeking Dismissal of Charges in the Mike Postle’ Cheating’ Case

Is Mike Postle (cover image) one of the greatest cash game players of his generation, or is he just a smart cheat?

This whole thing blew up last September, when Veronica Brill, a former commentator at the Stones Gambling Hall, called Postle out for cheating during the live-streamed games at the casino. The story has since slow-balled to become one of the biggest controversies of 2019. Even as the debate rages on in the poker community, the matter has reached the court with a class-action lawsuit filed by Brill and 24 others. Interestingly, Stones Gambling Hall has been named as one of the co-defendants in the case alongside Postle!

Clearly, Stones doesn’t want to become collateral damage in this lawsuit and has been pursuing legal remedies to get the charges against it dismissed. Last month, Stones’ then-parent firm King’s Casino LLC had filed a motion seeking dismissal of the charges against it in the case. In response, the plaintiffs amended their charges.

It`s worth noting that even the potential liability of the defendants in the case has increased substantially since the matter was initially filed in court. What was initially a class-action lawsuit involving 25 petitions and since expanded to 89 players.

Stones’ current owner, King’s Casino Management Corp, is not taking the matter lightly and has lawyered up to the get these charges dismissed. According to court filings, the company has filed a second motion in court seeking a dismissal of the case.

Latest Developments

Early in March, Stones’ previous owner, King’s Casino LLC had filed a motion at the U.S. District Court for California, seeking dismissal of its involvement in the case. Stones argued that the lawsuit by Brill and 24 others represented the oldest complaint of gamblers, that their lack of success meant that they were cheated.

Subsequently, Maurice VerStandig, who is representing the plaintiffs in the matter, amended the complaint leveling fresh allegations against Stones.

The casino has been charged with negligence, fraud, and violation of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). Additionally, Brill has also separately made a libel claim against Stones that had called her cheating allegations against Postle “completely fabricated.”

On April 8, King’s Casino Management Corp, the parent company of Stones, filed a second motion seeking dismissal of the case. In the 33-page updated motion, the firm has argued that casinos cannot be sued for gambling losses since they do not have a duty to players.

What the Updated Motion Says…

Questioning the increase in plaintiffs to 89, the company has claimed that the plaintiffs have failed “to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and failure to allege claims of fraud and misrepresentation with the required particularity.”

Citing past legal precedents like the 1997 case of Vu vs. California Commerce Club Inc., the motion further argues that damages cannot be determined since gambling losses are too speculative and are not cognizable as damages.

The motion reads, “Casinos do not owe a general duty of care to gamblers. Their failure to include adequate facts establishes they cannot support their claims. Plaintiffs can neither prove negligence nor fraud, they rely on innuendos and insinuations that are not substitutes for facts or law.”

Adding that Stones “did not have a duty to protect plaintiffs from gambling losses to Mr. Postle,” the card room claimed, “Nor have plaintiffs adequately alleged causation or loss. None of the Stones Fraud Plaintiffs have alleged that they ever actually played a hand of poker with Mr. Postle after a discussion with Mr. Kuraitis. Nor have they alleged they lost money to Mr. Postle after they spoke with Mr. Kuraitis, let alone made such allegations with the specificity required under the Federal Rules.”

VerStanding’s Response…

Reacting to the updated motion by Stones’ parent firm, Maurice VerStandig is reported to have stated, “We are in the process of reviewing and analyzing Stones’ motion, which appears to be a well-drafted document prepared by a group of excellent attorneys.”

“It is disappointing to see Stones continue to characterize my clients as essentially being sore losers, and it is disheartening to see a card room proclaim that it does not have a duty to its consumers even in a situation as egregious as this. However, we look forward to pursuing our case in court, will be opposing the motion in due course, and have every confidence in the judicial system,” he added.

Clearly, the casino is looking for a way out of this legal mess and fast!