Michigan Supreme Court to Hear BetMGM $3.2 Million Casino Win Dispute

Background

Davis’s lawsuit against BetMGM includes allegations of fraud, conversion, and breach of contract. The case was previously dismissed by lower courts, which ruled that it fell under the jurisdiction of the Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB).

Jacqueline Davis sued BetMGM in 2021 after the casino refused to honor her $3.2 million winnings from the Luck O’ the Roulette slot game, claiming a technical glitch caused an erroneous credit to her account.

BetMGM maintained that while the game displayed the correct win amounts, the credited amounts were mistakenly multiplied.

BetMGM sought a summary disposition, arguing that Davis’s claims were preempted by Michigan’s Lawful Internet Gaming Act (LIGA), which assigns the MGCB as the authority over such matters.

Both the Wayne County Circuit Court and the Michigan Court of Appeals sided with BetMGM, dismissing Davis’s case due to a lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Appeals Court Decision

The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s decision in September 2023. Judge Mark T. Boonstra, writing for the majority, stated that if a statute grants exclusive jurisdiction to the MGCB or another administrative agency, the circuit court lacks jurisdiction.

Judge Kathleen Feeney dissented, arguing that this interpretation leaves players without a venue to seek redress for grievances, effectively siding with operators.

Davis contends that although she filed a complaint with the MGCB, she had no participation or insight into the investigation or its outcome. She argues that the MGCB focuses on regulatory violations affecting a casino’s license rather than providing remedies for players. Davis’s appeal to the Supreme Court asserts that Michigan’s gaming laws are insufficient for resolving disputes between players and operators, leaving players without adequate legal recourse.

The Michigan Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case could have implications for the role of the judiciary in resolving disputes between players and gaming operators. If the court rules in favor of Davis, it may set a precedent for allowing courts to offer remedies beyond the administrative oversight of the MGCB.