Blazesoft has prevailed in two customer lawsuits, as both have been sent to arbitration. However, one plaintiff is attempting to appeal the judge’s decision with a higher court.
Last month, a Southern District of New York judge sent the class action lawsuit to arbitration. Plaintiff Autumn Boatner argued that Blazesoft’s online social casino brands Zula Casino, Sportzino and Fortune Coins are offering illegal online gambling in the state since they all operate under a dual-currency sweepstakes model.
As is often the case with lawsuits against online gaming sites, these cases go to arbitration because the terms and conditions users agree to stipulate that any disputes go to arbitration rather than the courts.
Debate over which laws dictate arbitration rules
In the Boatner case and a similar lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois, the plaintiffs argued that the Canadian-based Blazesoft agreement was bound to the Ontario Consumer Protection Act. However, the judge in the Illinois case concluded, since this was a case involving a U.S. customer and a Canadian company, the New York Convention, a United Nations treaty regarding international arbitration, prevailed in this instance. Under the New York convention, the judge concluded there was “no dispute” that the matter fell within the terms of the arbitration agreement.
The judge in New York drew the same conclusion, citing the ruling in Illinois in the decision.
Plaintiffs seeking a second chance in different ways
In both cases, the plaintiffs are seeking recourse on the decision, but they are going about it in different ways.
In Illinois, the plaintiffs fild a motion for reconsideration last month, which the judge agreed to take under advisement. In a motion for reconsideration, the judge who made the ruling revisits the decision. The plaintiffs are arguing that the choice-of-law clause in the terms and conditions nullifies the arbitration agreement. Should the judge choose to maintain his ruling, the plaintiffs are seeking interlocutory appeal.
In the Boatner case, she is immediately moving for interlocutory appeal, which is an appeal of a decision by a lower court judge that is not a final court order but one that has a material impact on the case. That request was filed on Dec. 9 and the judge in the case has yet to respond.
SBC Americas reached out to Blazesoft for comment on this story.
Edelson PC representing both plaintiffs
In both cases, the plaintiffs are represented by Edelson PC. The firm has extensive experience with sweepstakes gaming class action lawsuits. The group successfully argued its way to a nearly $25 million judgment against social gaming group High 5 Casino in Washington earlier this year. The firm also represents the man who is suing Stake.US.
In the Stake.US case, the judge did deny the motion to compel arbitration and ordered discovery to determine if the plaintiff did actually agree to the terms and conditions Stake said were presented before him.
