A lawsuit that was filed against SugarHouse Casino in Philadelphia has recently been withdrawn. According to the court documents, the attorneys of the two claimants who filed the lawsuit notified the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania that they had decided to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit, without prejudice. As such, they are still allowed to pursue litigation at a future date.
Anthony Mattia of Philadelphia and William Vespe of New Jersey, the two gamblers, filed the lawsuit against the casino operator in May this year after they lost a whopping $250,000 while gambling at the venue. According to them, they lost the money unfairly since the card shuffling machines at the gambling and entertainment venue were faulty. In addition to that, they also had concerns about the legitimacy of the cards that were used.
SugarHouse Casino’s Woes
As it turns out, the two gamblers chose to pursue the lawsuit against Rush Street Gaming, the owner of SugarHouse Casino, after they learned that the operator had been reprimanded by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) back in 2017. This was because SugarHouse had allegedly violated regulations by offering games that involved decks with either too few or too many cards.
The gaming control board also fined SugarHouse Casino for a total of three incidents in 2017 where an automatic card shuffler malfunctioned – this means that the casino operator dealt games where the odds had obviously been skewed. One of the most notable incidents in that regard was in May 2017 when a whopping 122 blackjack hands were dealt from a deck that had a card missing. After investigating the matter, the gaming control board found that a total of eight players were affected by that regulatory violations and seven of them even ended up losing money.
In a separate instance, a poker tournament dealer at eh casinos also dealt 16 cards to players with two unshuffled decks, that is after the automatic shuffle broke down. The cards in question ended up being dealt in a sequential and suited order. Moreover, on both occasions, the casino’s staff also failed to address warning light on the gaming machines.
How This is Related to the Lawsuit
The two gamblers who were frequent customers of the casino argued that they had been playing at the venue and lost huge sums of money during the time of the aforementioned infractions, they had been exposed to the same kind of unfairness. Well, it was worth a shot but it does not seem like they are planning to pursue this any further.
