There have been similar cases to this one in the past, including a lawsuit also filed in California against Fliff.
Stake argued that Boyles agreed to arbitrate any future claims when he created an account on the platform. That said, Stake also has an opt-out clause that Boyle could have sent. This would’ve required a written request, but according to Stake, no request was ever sent.
Before arbitration was granted, Boyle challenged it, claiming that Stake formed somewhat of an illegal contract, but US Central California District Court Judge James Selna did not side with that argument.
“The Court can only conclude that there is no procedural unconscionability as Boyle has failed to meet his burden,” the judge said. “Therefore, the Court finds that Boyle must arbitrate his claims with Sweepsteaks.”
Now, this dispute will be handled outside of court by a neutral third party as opposed to a trial.
By going to arbitration, this case will be removed from the public eye.
The judge didn’t rule on the legality of sweepstakes casinos but rather enforced the arbitration clause.
Read more at https://www.casino.com/news/legal/stake-us-california-lawsuit-sent-to-arbitration/
