USA: FanDuel and peers move to dismiss lawsuit tied to 300-year-old gambling law

FanDuel and other major U.S. sportsbook operators will ask a Washington, DC, court this week to dismiss a lawsuit brought under a law dating back more than 300 years, a case that could expose the companies to liabilities running into millions of dollars.

The lawsuit was filed last year by a Delaware-based firm, DC Gambling Recovery, against FanDuel, DraftKings and BetMGM. It relies on the Statute of Anne, an 18th-century law that allows recovery of gambling losses above $25 incurred in a single sitting.

The defendants, including Betfair Interactive, which operates FanDuel and is owned by Flutter Entertainment, have asked the court to dismiss the case. Support for dismissal has also come from Washington, DC, attorney general Brian Schwalb.

The court had been due to hear arguments on December 19, but later rescheduled the hearing to Friday of this week.

In their filings, the betting firms argue that subsequent legislation legalised sports gambling and rendered the Statute of Anne inapplicable to sports wagering. They point to amendments introduced through the district’s Budget Support Act for 2026, which modified a pre-existing code that imposed treble damages on certain losing wagers above $25.

https://www.yogonet.com/international/news/2026/01/08/117045-fanduel-and-peers-move-to-dismiss-lawsuit-tied-to-300yearold-gambling-law

Google AI

The Statute of Anne (1710) was a British law, adopted by some U.S. states like Maryland and D.C., that aimed to curb excessive gambling by allowing losers of £10 (around $25) or more in one sitting to recover those losses within three months, or a third party could sue for treble damages, with half going to the plaintiff and half to the poor; it also voided gambling debts and punished fraudulent winnings, but its application, especially to modern sports betting, is now debated and updated.

Key Provisions & History

Origin: Enacted in Britain during Queen Anne’s reign (1709-1710).
Purpose: To stop ruinous gambling by making certain debts unrecoverable and allowing recovery of losses.
Loss Recovery: A gambler losing £10 (roughly $25 in that era) or more at cards, dice, or other games could sue to get it back within three months.
Third-Party Action: If the loser didn’t act, any other person could sue the winner for triple the amount lost (treble damages), with half going to the plaintiff and half to the parish poor.
Voiding Debts: It made securities or conveyances for gambling debts void.
Fraud: Winning more than £10 by fraud was treated as perjury, allowing recovery of five times the winnings.

Modern Application (D.C. Example)

Codified Law: D.C. adopted it as D.C. Code § 16-1702.
Debate: Recent lawsuits have tried to use the Statute to recover significant sports betting losses, arguing it applies to modern wagers, while betting firms contend newer laws override it.

In essence, it’s an ancient law designed to prevent financial ruin from gambling that some believe still has relevance, while others argue it’s outdated.