I have not reviewed it close enough to see what has been pled in order to get jurisdiction in the Las Vegas court. 20-CV-00640 if you have PACER...or you can just search for Postle as a party...

Demand in this one is $250K.

He didn't "win". The court didn't hold that there was no evidence, or that he didn't cheat, or anything of that nature. The court (specific to the case against him) said that it doesn't matter if he cheated, it's a gambling dispute, and we are prohibited from hearing those.

California judicial precedent is that the public policy of the state prohibits courts from hearing disputes between parties over gambling wins/losses. The main case cited (Kelly) had cheating that was not in dispute.

I had no assumptions about either.


If the star of the Stones Live poker production wants to go to court to prove that he didn't cheat to win, I think many people would love to see that happen. If I'm involved, I'll dedicate my entire life to it to figuring out what really happened here and finding the right people to help with the case. I have the jugs of water and bottles of adderall ready.

Marle Cordeiro's lawsuit against Postle.

I wonder if Mac (since it's the same lawyer who represented the group suing postle in California that just got dismissed) intentionally had Marle file in Nevada since she's a resident of Nevada (and the rest of the people suing Postle were all California residents) and thus used her residency in Nevada to get jurisdiction there (to avoid California courts since they would rely on Kelly).

Edit - this lawsuit - https://www.pokernews.com/news/2020/...stle-37001.htm

https://law.justia.com/cases/califor...th/72/462.html

The Kelly case cited.

Here's the initial complaint from a cardplayer link for those who don't have PACER.

https://media.cardplayer.com/assets/...028/1-main.pdf

Original article: https://www.cardplayer.com/poker-new...at-mike-postle

Looks like the argument is NV jurisdiction is okay b/c of three possible ways - either diversity (Cordeiro lives in Nevada), or because one of the claims comes from a RICO act violation, or because she was invited to play in the game while she was physically in Nevada.

What I don't understand...is that in all these sessions, not one person to his left or right tried looking under the table to see if he had his phone between his legs?

Just a pathetic scenario, and don't understand why the US is so ass backwards with regards to all things poker. I am sure if the US got a cut of all poker revenue things would be a lot different in regards to poker.

The state of California does get a cut of poker and casino revenues. Where there is legal online poker, the state does get a cut. The US federal government does not get a cut.

Oh, I don't know about that. In this case, technology completely enabled the cheating to happen.

You're right, cheating can and does happen in ways that do not require it. But in this particular instance, the combination of camera gear, networking equipment and personal electronics (both the phone and bone conduction headphones) were alleged tools. If the power went out, Postle turns into any other player.

I'm more concerned about the Kelly v. First Astri precedent. If I'm reading it right –*and PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong – my home state will not adjudicate any player-to-player disputes. In other words, if a player was to cheat the house, or the casino cheats its players, then the legal system can step in. But if one individual has a dispute with another individual regarding the fairness of a bet, the legal system will not intervene as a matter of policy. Is that about right?

If so, that's problem.

I actually read it even more disturbingly.

I believe even a case between a casino and a cheated (or cheating) player over the money won/lost would be barred from being resolved in a California court.

However, a player v. house dispute could be resolved via, say, a gaming commission hearing. Or because the type of cheating that is player v. house is likely done via something that is explicitly illegal, you'd also have criminal liability in play.

But specifically in regards to a dispute between parties over potential cheating in gambling activities between the parties, there is no recourse in California Civil courts. And since that's pretty much the only avenue for recourse if it's between two individuals, then the cheated party is just SOL in terms of seeking damages from the cheating party.

Was that Kelly case absolutely binding, or was that just the way the judge in this case ruled in order to dismiss the case?

I an well aware. My local casino has actually been withholding the States money since they had opened a few racinos in the region. Clearly since I said US I meant the federal government not individual states. Online Poker is held back in most states. The federal government should be the one running a US wide poker site and just be done with it. Like the states did by running their own lotteries killing the illegal numbers racket, a US site run by the gov would eliminate all the BS these sites do.

Imagine if every poker home game dispute was taken to the courts...

The court is not interested in hearing a gambling dispute. To begin with, the parties probably are running afoul of numerous laws before the dispute even began, same with drug deals.

Since this involves a licensed California gambling establishment the Nevada case won't last long.

Thanks.

The service was lodged May 18. Mac represents Marle.

The Judge on the case, Jim Mahan, is a terrific judge.

(I litigated cases before him many years ago in State court. One time, at the end of a factual hearing of some complexity, he announced he was ready to rule on the case from the bench. Since he indicated my client had won, I was going to be tasked with drafting the order to be signed.. Judge Mahan then rattled off about 50 paragraphs of findings, and conclusions of law, in great detail. It was really impressive.)

I do not know if Marle, as a plaintiff in the California case is somehow estopped by how Mr. Postle was dismissed from that case with prejudice. That might be an interesting issue, at least to lawyers.

I did not think Marle was part of the original litigation. I don’t imagine Nevada law ever applies here in the choice of law question for the same COAs from the CA case but maybe Mac has a trick up his sleeve.

for reference, in case you dont know what he looks like. If you see him at your table, make sure you call him out for what he is.








I spared you the "allegedly" bs. This dude absolutely cheated a poker game in the worst way possible and identical to what Russ Hamilton did.

Stones poker should not sue anyone, since your moneys are peanuts. More damage than possible gains.

But Postle should absolutely sue you and Polk, if he is not set for life.

1) You two have money.
2) Burden of proof is your side since you made accusations, which made impossible for Postle to earn his living.
3) You two moneytized accusation process, which makes it possible for Postle demand more $$$.

Most likely Postle will not sue. Which is stupid, since I would assume he is not multimillionare.

Case is not about if Postle cheated, but if Polk have enough evidence for it. Otherwise it is false accusation to gain money destroying one nonpublic (can be relevant) man possibility to make his living.

why are the absolute dumbest posts almost always from people with less than 3 posts

That living is through gambling though, and we know that California courts won't attach a dollar amount to anything gambling related since it's impossible to accurately judge the amount. After all, Postle might be a lifetime losing player.

I still have no idea why someone thinks it's impossible for postle to play poker.

Where money comes for Postle's living, if not from poker? Possible, if he is losing player, or have not paid taxes, then Postle should not sue anyone like ever.

Root for Postle for this. After court win 500/1000 HU deadmatch against Polk.

For some reason they live in this fantasy world where the rooms will all unite and ban him.

The reality is no card room other than Stones or a live stream game will give two sheits about it. Especially since he's probably mostly going to be playing 2/5 stakes. He could go to Vegas right now and sit in a game and no one is going to do sheit.

People really think the degens playing at the table are going to get up from the game when he sits down?

Hey Mike nice account buddy. Can you enlighten us how much was Justin's cut?

Is Postle gonna try and convince Joey on stream!? Or is he too chicken? STEP IN THE RING POSTLE!