Originally Posted by Frenbar
Personally I think the OP is seriously deranged.
Based on the account of the OP, he fronted the $10k to the tournament based on the promise of a 3rd party that had nothing to do with the horse. The OP even admits that he didn't tell the horse about the $10k promised by the 3rd party after he knew that the 3rd party was no good for it and the horse had no idea. This debt is between the 3rd party and the OP, period.
"We both accept his stake
however this left Brendon $10,000 short of a buy in for the tournament and did not have the money available to play. I lent him the $10,000 and said I would just get the money from the acquaintance
My first year law school knowledge leads me to believe that there was a contract between Brendon and degen gambler ("we both accept his stake"). Pretty certain a new contract isn't formed upon monster dong offering to get the money from degen gambler (which is a form of an assignment of debt). It does not make sense for monster dong to incur an extra 10k liability for no consideration. The 10k dong gave brendon in place of degen gambler's 10k is a favor.
If it went to court, I think brendon and jonno win vs degen gambler and then jonno vs brendon, jonno wins. Small claims court.
As for the hacking, it would seem to be a case of negligence - tort law. Not securing his cash after actual knowledge of danger. question of what a reasonable person would do etc etc...
Dong/jonno, don't rely on this advice, lawyer up and sue everyone.
gosh I hope I don't get flamed by all the legal geniuses on this site.