A US District Court Judge this afternoon granted motions to dismiss all claims in the allegations Mike Postle cheated poker players in livestreamed games at Stones Gambling Hall in northern California.
Judge William Shubb – in a 24-page order – outlined his decision siding with the legal team representing the owners of Stones. Part of the explanation included citing previous California cases where, “California public policy bars judicial intervention in gambling disputes.”
Shubb dismissed all claims against the company owning Stones, against Postle and against Justin Kuraitis – tournament director and lead for the Stones livestreams at the time the claims were filed – yet left available to the law firm representing more than 80 poker players the option to file an amended complaint addressing some of the initial claims.
Postle was contacted late this afternoon and declined comment at this time. Postle has stated to me previously his belief of innocence, while a number of plaintiffs have stated to me their belief he cheated them in many livestreamed poker games at Stones.
“Disappointment is not a strong enough word, but we will continue the fight with an amended pleading,” tweeted Mac VerStandig, whose law firm represented the plaintiffs in this case.
Veronica Brill, who first made public the allegations in Tweets some nine months ago, was asked for comment and said her recent Tweets contained her public comment.
“Just letting the poker community know that if you decide to cheat on a live stream you are free to do so. There will be no accountability for your actions and you are free to steal hundreds of thousands of dollars. The casino, and employees who might help you, are not accountable,” one of her Tweets reads.
Brill, at one time a commentator on livestreams from Stones who also hosted livestreamed games in her name at the cardroom – directs tweeted comment at the California Gambling Control Commission, responsible in part for oversight of more than 70 cardrooms in the state, including Stones Gambling Hall.
“Also it is obvious how oblivious to the game of poker the group that oversees poker in California gaming is. They have no idea how to detect cheating that happens under their nose,” Brill Tweeted.
In addressing the poker player’s claims to obtain back losses in games Postle played, the judge wrote California public policy doesn’t give the plaintiffs’ any standing.
Shubb wrote he found gambling losses, “are barred from recovery by California public policy … the California state legislature still has not created a statutory right to permit individuals to recover their gambling losses.”
While recovering losses in poker games may not be an option, Shubb is leave open a chance for an amended complaint where the plaintiffs can try to prove they are entitled to having the rake from each played hand returned to them, should they succeed in a future case.
The plaintiffs’ legal team made allegations in previous court documents they believed a Stones employee assisted Postle in his poker games where the plaintiffs allege cheating. The person was never named, and that lack of naming the individual was brought up by judge Shubb in his ruling.
“Without this information, the court cannot adequately assess the intent to defraud, whether the plaintiffs’ reliance was justified, or whether Stones held itself out as an honest business “without reasonable ground for believing” it to be true,” wrote Shubb.
Shubb left open the plaintiffs’ option to file an amended pleading for Negligent Misrepresentation by naming who they allege this person is.
Attempts to reach VerStandig and ask for the name of this person have not been successful so far. Brill has also been asked and has not responded.
Claims against Justin Kuraitis, tournament director and lead for the Stones livestreams at the time the claims were filed, were also dismissed today by Shubb.
Joey Ingram, who made a large number of videos from clips of Stones livestreams, alleging repeatedly his belief his clips showed evidence of Postle cheating. Ingram tweeted shortly after the ruling his belief the judge – at least initially – did not understand the case.
“It doesn’t seem like this judge had much an idea what was going on during the initial hearing,” tweeted Ingram.
The entire 24-page ruling can be read here.
(Note: I have known Mike Postle and many of the plaintiffs for many years, having met each of them in poker rooms around the country. I stayed away from direct reporting on the case due to knowing many of the individuals involved. I am, however, writing this as I can provide public access to the judge’s decision and any available comment).
Dan is the founder of PokerLiveUpdates, a veteran poker tournament reporter who can be found wandering somewhat aimlessly through tournament arenas worldwide. As a founding member of FunTour2.0, he searches for the best in craft beer at all locations in the poker world.
