Generally speaking, an opinion letter is written for a specific client, and cannot be shared unless the client chooses to do so. I am not aware of any of these opinion letters that have been so shared. Wish I could help.

Cheers, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

For fear of repeating myself, the same thing was said about online poker in the USA.

Seems like a lot of mind-reading Greg.

You’re talking about Federal vs state.

Totally different

The law that you claim to be “obvious”, is a state law. The Feds shut down online poker due to money laundering, banking laws. It had nothing to do with gambling

Do you understand the difference between Federal and State laws?

You claimed poker rooms in Texas wouldn't have happened if it was so obvious they were illegal. I said if that's the case then why did online poker in the USA happen. And your response is one was illegal on a state level and the other federal. What does that have to do with your point?

Greg is generally right on this issue. Good lawyers (like the ones that TCH’s undoubtedly hired) are going to err on the side of caution. But I think there is confusion on “opinion letters” versus getting legal advice on what to do.

Consider these two dream worlds:

Dream World One

You are a lawyer. TCH’s founder is your client. Your client tells you he wants to start card rooms around Texas, and he wants to know if this is legal. You do the legal research, and you quickly realize that this issue boils down how 47.04(b)(2) is interpreted. Your legal opinion is that it’s a gray area.

You have two options.

Option 1: You tell your client that he is 100% safe. Your client likely gets into some legal trouble down the line. At minimum, there is no “keeping the fees coming in.” The client is upset at you for the poor legal advice, and he may rightly sue you for malpractice.

Option 2: You tell your client that this is a gray area of the law. You lay out the current state of the caselaw, showing how the statute has been interpreted in different ways, and you tell the client to weigh the risks himself. In this situation, the client has gotten accurate legal advice, and he can make an informed decision. The client decides to go for it and opens a card room. It is successful and remains open for a while. He repeats the process and opens several more card rooms. Eventually one of the rooms faces legal trouble, and he reaches out to you again for legal help because you represented his interests well in the first project.

Dream World Two

You are a lawyer. TCH’s founder is your client. Your client tells you he wants to start card rooms around Texas, and he wants an opinion telling him that it’s fine to operate card rooms in Texas. You do the legal research, and you quickly realize that this issue boils down how 47.04(b)(2) is interpreted. Your legal opinion is that it’s a gray area.

Option 1: You tell your client “great news” you are 100% safe on this issue. You tell him you are happy to write a legal opinion to that effect. Your client gets arrested for violating the statute. Your client tells the judge / the DA / the police (whoever will listen), that his lawyer told him it was ok. He has this opinion letter that says so. They say “so what” and he goes to jail and card room closes.

Option 2: You tell your client this is a gray area of the law. I can write you an opinion letter stating that it is my opinion that this is legal or should be legal, but it will not offer you any legal protection if you open and operate a card room. You may be able to use the opinion letter to convince a landlord to give you a lease or try to convince political officials to support you or even to try to convince a DA not to prosecute you, but ultimately, it’s not a get out of jail free card. Your client says I understand, and I would still like the letter. You say ok and collect the fee.

In either world, the lawyer isn’t going to lie to the client. There is no benefit to doing that, and there are serious detriments.

You would? Why? This isn't their business at all. Many major casinos see poker rooms as an amenity, not a big money maker. Wynn opening a poker room in Dallas would be like them opening a night club in Dallas, except that they make a hell of a lot more money from the night club business than they do from the poker business. One could argue them opening a poker room in Dallas would be like them opening a resort style swimming pool in Dallas. Between, MGM, Caesars and Wynn, how many of these companies do you think looked into the opportunity of opening a poker room in Texas? My guess is zero.

That being said, there are other gambling places in Texas where fees are charged for gamblers to use the facilities/equipment. Two such examples are pool halls and country clubs. Gambling in these places far predates the opening of the first of these poker rooms 7 years ago.

Seems a bit different. TCH worked hand in hand with city officials and Dallas law enforcement for a couple years before they opened this room. I doubt that happened with online poker, not that it really matters as it is completely off topic.

you guys seem to be arguing the wrong issues... doesn't really matter if they're legal or not under the law. The texas attorney general says he will not rule on their legality. It essentially means he doesn't want any local AG filing charges that will ultimately go to trial that will ultimately end up in the supreme court and he would possibly have to get involved in. There are other ways to deter businesses though as we already seen like revoking permits or filing different charges like money laundering etc though. Legality really isn't the issue it's that places where the overwhelming interest is for them (like everywhere besides Dallas) they will be fine and in Dallas they will always have issues because of choctaw/winstar etc.

Neither of which are involved in the adjudication of law. The Dallas DA on the other hand...

It certainly wouldn't have been started by someone that worked for the Chairman of the Licensing and Administrative committee, which is the legislative committee that essentially oversees gaming in the state of Texas.

https://house.texas.gov/committees/c...committee=C350


Funny enough, they were mentioned on the opening night of the first poker club in Texas.

'“We got lobbied by all the major casinos including Harrah’s and MGM. They all wanted a piece of Texas,” Sam mentioned on the club’s grand opening night.'

Source: Flashback to March of 2015


Definitely not in the majority. Actually, it seems the only ones that oppose these rooms do so because it's in their own political interest to do so. The city of Dallas was fully onboard with these rooms until Champions Poker Room tried to open near a wealthy neighborhood. Then, the city only changed its legal opinion about these rooms after being sued by Champions. The ability for cities/counties to change their opinion on the legality of these rooms is a significant risk to these rooms.

You mean the same Dallas DA that has not supported the city's efforts to shut TCH Dallas down? I would find it highly unlikely that they opened this location without first consulting with the Dallas DA's office.

Thanks, can you provide a link to the DA not supporting the Dallas city attorney's efforts to shut down TCH? I hadn't come across that in my reading.

The onus here is really on you to provide a link showing where the DA has supported the Dallas city attorney's effort. The DA could have had this room raided months ago. Not only did the DA not take actions against this poker room, but he hasn't even provide a simple letter of support for the city in their fight against TCH.

You made the claim the DA has not supported the city attorney's effort to shut down TCH but somehow the onus is on me to prove the opposite is true? That's a unique twist.

Proving non-existence is a logical fallacy. He has literally done nothing to support the city despite having significant power to do so. The burden of proof is most certainly on you to show how he has supported the city in these efforts.

I never made a claim the DA supported the city's effort so why would the burden be on me to prove a claim I never made?

Wrong. Most of the big casino entities have looked into the Texas market. Sands Corp. has shown the most interest and spent a lot in political contributions in Texas. They simply will not do it until the law is amended or there is a Texas Supreme Court ruling. They are pushing for sports betting and full service casinos as well but they know poker and slots are step one. Baby steps.

Dream Crusher-


Yes the casinos have been lobbying in Texas for over 20 years. But haven’t done anything Texas because of the law. This year for the first time, the Republicans opened the door to the possibility of legal gaming in Texas down the road. This was after Sheldon Adelstein’s wife contributed a bunch of money to Republican candidates in Texas.

The DA in Harris County is not raiding time rake rooms.
The DA in Harris County is not raiding underground rooms which are taking a pot rake. (Surely no one would argue they are legal) These types of rooms previously were raided on a case by case basis.
Several former time rake rooms have switched to pot rake . They are openly raking every pot and the authorities do not seem to differentiate this type of rake from time rake.
In other words, the DA does not care about poker right now . This could change in the future or it could stay the same.
Side notes: the first rake point in some “legal” or time rake rake rooms is $25.
They take $5 as soon as the pot hits $25

Unrelated (possibly)
Pot smokers used to get taken to jail. Now , the police don’t bother them ,or just give them a ticket
My theory is that the DA does not want to waste money and resources on minor crimes.

What am I wrong about? I've literally posted about the political contributions on this forum just a few days ago and don't understand why you are reiterating what has already been posted.

I do agree with you that they would not want to enter the market while the law is still in a gray area, but the idea that one of these large companies would come to Texas to build a nice poker room is completely idiotic.

Then please share with us your relevant education, training, or experience when it comes to interpreting legal statutes and regulations. Mine is the most obvious sort, I graduated law school, three different bar exams, and practiced law for 12 years.

Thanks, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

All the nuances and fancy schemes to get around the law are all well and good.

seat fees, pool tables, checker boards, social clubs on and on.

But as soon as a dealer sits at a table (unless they are working for free) they are receiving economic benefit for facilitating a game a of chance and in violation of the law

If you all wouldn't have had made fun of my electronic poker tables and ran them all out of town, we could have legal poker all over Texas. You only have yourself to blame
(only half joking)

Greg I have to disagree with you on this one. You are wrong about the opinion letters and you are wrong on the statute. I have practiced law over 20 years in the State of Texas.

The reason the clubs have been able to operate is simply because law enforcement and/or the DA’s are not enforcing the law (I am glad because I like to play poker). If anybody wanted to actually bring a test case up to the Texas Supreme Court the poker clubs would lose unanimously. They might be able to win in the District Courts or even various appellate courts but not if it gets appealed to the highest court in the state. The Texas Supreme Court is all Republican judges, extremely conservative to say the least and gambling is still a frowned upon vice in the state.