Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

News, Views, and Gossip For poker news, views, and gossip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-21-2016, 05:08 PM   #1
likes
journeyman
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 250
Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

http://blogs.northjersey.com/meadowl...form=hootsuite

Cliffs:

Ivey did not commit a fraud

Ivey did breach his "contract" with Borgata

Ivey gets 0

Borgata may get something from Ivey
likes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 05:11 PM   #2
restorativejustice
veteran
 
restorativejustice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,750
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

I would have ruled it the exact opposite way and given the same amount.

#PardonPhil #PardonJulian
restorativejustice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 05:22 PM   #3
topdoll827
centurion
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Jersey (Channel Islands)
Posts: 106
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Ouch! Looks like can possibly appeal to court of appeal but it's going to be an expensive legal point to argue.
topdoll827 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 06:37 PM   #4
kerze
old hand
 
kerze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: whootyland
Posts: 1,708
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Cate Hall gives a pretty good cliffs on twitter.


My own take:

The breach of contract seems to be that by flipping the house edge Ivey breached his contract. Well every single card counter does that. So did Don Johnson when he negotiated changes to rules for blackjack and a loss rebate. Johnson certainly didn't explain to the casinos that the rules changes and loss rebate expected would flip the edge. They saw him as a huge whale and complied with his requests.
kerze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 06:44 PM   #5
ChocolateCake123
stranger
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Very bad news for Ivey. Basically, the casino had two theories why Ivey should lose case... The Judge denied one but agreed on the second theory so IVey loses. The casino will now submit the damages to the judge for approval. They will want the 9-10 million that Ivey won + interest on that money + Ivey will have to pay the casino's attorney fees (probably 500k to 1 million).

Ivey can appeal but he will probably have to put up an appeal bond (which may be difficult) and if he loses the appeal he will have to pay more interest and more attorney's fees for himself and pay the casino's attorney's appellate costs as well.

I would not be surprised if Ivey files for personal bankruptcy in order to shield himself from having to pay the full judgment.

Either way this is terrible news for Ivey.

Last edited by ChocolateCake123; 10-21-2016 at 06:50 PM.
ChocolateCake123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 06:49 PM   #6
ChocolateCake123
stranger
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

By the way, I disagree with the court on its ruling. The casino agreed to change the normal terms of the game by agreeing to Ivey's 5 requests. The fact that Ivey was able to gain an advantage as a result does not mean that he commited a breach. The casino could have said No to any of his requests. Bad ruling by this judge who obviously has no intimate knowledge of the gambling world.
ChocolateCake123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 06:54 PM   #7
kerze
old hand
 
kerze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: whootyland
Posts: 1,708
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

As far as I know Borgata's case against Gemaco is still outstanding. Can they double dip and recover damages from both Ivey and Gemaco?
kerze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 07:10 PM   #8
DustyA
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 96
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Why isn't the casino guilty of the same breach with the CCA as Ivey? They to swung the ads in Ivey's favor by manipulating the game at Ivey's request?

"The breach of contract by Ivey and his partner, the judge found, is because their actions led the cards to be “marked” even though neither player ever touched the cards themselves"

The casino marked the cards for the player. How is this any different if a BJ dealer was working with a player and marked the cards or purposefully flashed their down card? Is the casino breaking the rules in this case?

Just because the casino did not profit from breaking the rules does not mean they did not break the rules.
DustyA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 07:33 PM   #9
TrustInBrass_KAOS
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 332
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Quote:
By using cards they caused to be maneuvered in order to identify their value only to them, Ivey and Sun adjusted the odds of Baccarat in their favor. This is in complete contravention of the fundamental purpose of legalized gambling, as set forth by the CCA.
The article doesn't list where you can find the full judgment, so I can't figure out which provisions of the CCA the Borgata alleged were violated. Anyone have a link to the judgment?
TrustInBrass_KAOS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 07:47 PM   #10
topdoll827
centurion
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Jersey (Channel Islands)
Posts: 106
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

I think asking the croupier to turn the cards around to make them readable was a big factor or at least it certainly was in the U.K. Genting judgement.
topdoll827 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 08:52 PM   #11
Nick_AA
old hand
 
Nick_AA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,458
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Such BS- just goes to show the gross legal manipulation that goes on to fix legal disputes in favor of the most powerful. Ivey's face probably looked just like my avatar after he heard the news : /
Nick_AA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 09:18 PM   #12
jjb511
grinder
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 544
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrustInBrass_KAOS View Post
The article doesn't list where you can find the full judgment, so I can't figure out which provisions of the CCA the Borgata alleged were violated. Anyone have a link to the judgment?
Don't have the judgment. Sounded to me that the judge, through tortured reasoning, was saying that the state permits casinos in games where the house has the edge so that the state benefits by getting a percentage of the house win. Therefore, Ivey breached the "contract" with the casino by avoiding the casinos guaranteed edge.

Personally, I like his chances on appeal (at least on this issue) but, the casino may win on their appeal of the denial of fraud
jjb511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 10:36 PM   #13
PokerFan2008
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,089
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Casinos never lose, Ivey is lucky he is not going to jail...
PokerFan2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2016, 11:45 PM   #14
ESW
journeyman
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 235
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrustInBrass_KAOS View Post
The article doesn't list where you can find the full judgment, so I can't figure out which provisions of the CCA the Borgata alleged were violated. Anyone have a link to the judgment?
It looks like this last opinion was for a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Ivey, and I wasn't able to find a copy of that on the internet.

But it looks like there's an opinion for an earlier Motion to Dismiss, that mentions CCJ 5:12, without actually listing any as part of the Breach of Contract claim specifically:

http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20..****%20v.%20IVEY

I also found the complaint for Borgata v Ivey, but haven't found anything for Ivey's countersuit:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/218570101...-Pro-Phil-Ivey
ESW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 12:51 AM   #15
Flying Player
journeyman
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 229
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

This is a horrible decision by a judge with a very warped view of gambling. It seems like the part of the contract that Ivey broke was the part where he was supposed to lose. The logic that Ivey somehow marked the deck without ever touching a card eludes me. No idea what the flaw in the cards actually looks like but I would think that flipping the cards around a certain way simply made it easier to see the flaw. The flaw is there and can be seem no matter which way the cards is turned. If the result is a new rule that says cards must lay as they fall to prevent/minimize anyone else from exploiting a similar flaw in future that would be fine. To retroactively enforce this non existent rule is absurd.

The other major issue I have with the decision is the judge used the lack of any ruling from New Jersey Gaming Regulators (the supposed experts on gaming) as his open door to inject his own uninformed and tortured logic. How about the interpretation that New Jersey Gaming didn't issue a ruling because they saw nothing to rule on?

Ivey appealed the UK decision, I would assume he will do the same here. Not sure if New Jersey has the requirement to post a judgement bond to be able to appeal but I don't think they do, they are not as regressive as Florida which is one jurisdiction that does have that requirement.
Flying Player is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 01:18 AM   #16
PasswordGotHacked
banned
 
PasswordGotHacked's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: With your sister
Posts: 2,913
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

So in idiots terms the definition of legal gambling as far as the court is concerned is when only the casino can win if this shifts and the casino cant win due to ANY action by the player this is a breach of contract?
PasswordGotHacked is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 01:53 AM   #17
riverboatking
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
riverboatking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: trying to get out of my wheelchair
Posts: 21,421
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

ya if that's what the judge is saying that's the most retarded **** I've ever heard.
riverboatking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 03:15 AM   #18
OmahaFanatical4
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,123
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Quote:
The flaw is there and can be seem no matter which way the cards is turned.
You flip the cards so they are marked, that is so the flaw is on the left when they are 8s or 9s and on the right when they are not.
OmahaFanatical4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 04:07 AM   #19
A_C_Slater
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
A_C_Slater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: YangGang2020
Posts: 8,028
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Has a judge ever ruled in the favor of an individual over a corporation when lotto level money is on the line?
A_C_Slater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 05:03 AM   #20
davmcg
veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,307
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying Player View Post
No idea what the flaw in the cards actually looks like but I would think that flipping the cards around a certain way simply made it easier to see the flaw. The flaw is there and can be seem no matter which way the cards is turned.
I love it when someone on NVG decides to give their barrack-room lawyer opinion when they don't have a clue about the basics of the case.
davmcg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 05:10 AM   #21
.isolated
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
.isolated's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Better, but not perfect.
Posts: 19,114
Thumbs down Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by davmcg View Post
I love it when someone on NVG decides to give their barrack-room lawyer opinion when they don't have a clue about the basics of the case.
You realize this is NVG, right? Gossip...speculation...gfy...etc...
.isolated is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 05:23 AM   #22
topdoll827
centurion
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Jersey (Channel Islands)
Posts: 106
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

The judge has very creatively found a way to come to the decision that he wanted to by using a " breach of contract " rule. I didn't even realise that in the US this law existed & find it hard to accept when ordinarily the customer is signing nothing. I don't think such a law exists in the UK but may be wrong. After researching, it appears that, certainly in the US, this law does exist & due to that I don't think Ivey has much hope in this case. I'm no lawyer but that's how I see it because you gamble & the casino allows you to gamble with both sides having to be aware the house has an edge.Better watch out playing that slot that you've seen some guy pump loads of cash into without hitting ......
topdoll827 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 06:34 AM   #23
Gin 'n Tonic
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Gin 'n Tonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Reclining my seat
Posts: 6,306
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by topdoll827 View Post
I think asking the croupier to turn the cards around to make them readable was a big factor or at least it certainly was in the U.K. Genting judgement.
One wonders if Ivey had been a bit less greedy and willing to accept a smaller edge he'd have got away with it. Surely if he can only see the 'marked' cards half the time he still has a substantial edge.
Gin 'n Tonic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 07:04 AM   #24
topdoll827
centurion
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Jersey (Channel Islands)
Posts: 106
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gin 'n Tonic View Post
One wonders if Ivey had been a bit less greedy and willing to accept a smaller edge he'd have got away with it. Surely if he can only see the 'marked' cards half the time he still has a substantial edge.
Exactly correct, could of potentially milked it for years......
topdoll827 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2016, 09:06 AM   #25
TronaldDump
enthusiast
 
TronaldDump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 63
Re: Decision in Ivey/Borgata Case

expected tbh
TronaldDump is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online