Poker vLog 40 I Was Cheated At Stones Gambling Hall Mister Wegas. Unsubscribe from Mister Wegas? Poker vLog 41 In One Day From Club One Fresno to Golden West Bakersfield. THE TAVERN — STONES GAMBLING HALL Step into the excitement of California style gaming at The Tavern. Whether you enjoy the thrill of classic California Blackjack, or adrenaline packed Pai Gow. Stones Gambling Hall in Citrus Heights, Calif., has opened an outdoor casino with poker. Gaming tables and restaurants are housed under a large tent to conform with state guidance. Poker will be 8-handed on tables with Plexiglas dividers. Masks and temperature checks are mandatory. 25 poker players join initial filing. Mike Postle, Justin Kuraitis, and King’s Casino LLC, the parent company of California’s Stones Gambling Hall, have been sued today by 25 players who believe they were defrauded by Postle’s alleged cheating play during dozens of episodes of Stones Live poker cash games. Stones Gambling Hall Files Another Motion To Dismiss Poker Cheating Lawsuit Tournament Director Justin Kuraitis Also Files To Have Case Thrown Out by Card Player News Team Published: May 18, 2020.
The alleged cheating scheme facilitated by Stones Gambling Hall in Citrus Heights is finally coming to an end with a $30 million lawsuit reaching a conclusion with the majority of plaintiffs accepting the terms of a newly-brokered deal between all parties involved.
It took a year, but finally an “amicable settlement” has been reached, confirmed Maurice “Mac” VerStandig, a lawyer who took the case including some 90 plaintiffs who alleged that Stones Gambling Hall and Mike Postle, the player who was allegedly cheating but was acquitted earlier this year, had been cheating.
Postle was winning 94% of his hands in games hosted by the venue. As it turns out, though, no foul play had been involved, VerStandig said on behalf of 60 plaintiffs, with the rest still considering whether to submit an amended complaint by October 1, 2020.
VerStandig and Stones Gambling Hall Settle Amicably
The settlement effectively led to the dismissal of the case against Justin Kuraitis, a Stones’ live poker manager, who was accused of facilitating the cheating that supposedly took place during the live games.
After reviewing the footage closely, though, even VerStandig said that he and the plaintiffs were sure that there had been no cheating on behalf of Postle, the venue or Kuraitis.
“Based on our investigation, we are satisfied that Stones and Mr. Kuraitis were not involved in any cheating that may have occurred. While Stones has not spoken publicly regarding the details of their investigation during its pendency, its counsel and Mr. Kuraitis’ counsel have been immensely cooperative behind-the-scenes.”
Nevertheless, Richard Pachter, attorney for Justin Kuraitis cautioned that the settlement was not final and that there were plaintiffs who may choose to pursue the case.
Not All Plaintiffs Have Accepted Settlement
Previously, the case was dismissed by a federal judge in Sacramento who argued that under California law, lawsuits to recover gambling losses may not be filed. The plaintiffs had to amend their complaint and filed it again which eventually led to this week’s settlement.
The case has had its twists and turns. Mike Postle, the player around whom the entire case was focused on was not mentioned in the settlement. He was acquitted previously and now that Stones Gambling Hall and Kuraitis are in the clear, the case can finally be settled.
That is unless the remaining plaintiffs choose to pursue the case further and resubmit an amended complaint. Veronica Brill, a recreational player, was the first to throw the first punch at Mike Postle arguing that his winning streak, with Postle amassing some $250,000 between July 2018 and September 2019, was due to cheating with the help of someone at the casino.
Now that none of the allegations have been proven that begs the question whether the community doesn’t owe Postle and Kuraitis an apology. Both individuals’ reputations were tarnished with Twitter users taking jabs at them online and calling them cheaters.
Commenting on the social media pressure, Kuraitis had this to say cited by the Merced Sun-Star: “The Twitter mob is real, it is ugly, and it has real life consequences. I have never before experienced so much hatred, ignorance and even threats of violence.”
Postle has decided to withdraw from live poker, and with the COVID-19 lockdown hitting all poker rooms across the United States, it may be the right time for a break. In the meantime, VerStandig explained that Stone Gambling Hall has even agreed to pay an undisclosed settlement sum as a token of good will.
- Tags:
Table Of Contents
Last week, we reported on the lawsuit settlement between Stones Gambling Hall and 62 of 88 plaintiffs represented by Maurice “Mac” VerStandig. Those who settled were barred from discussing the settlement, so details were understandably scarce.
Stones Gambling Hall Twitter
However, PokerNews has obtained a copy of the Settlement Term Sheet originally presented to the plaintiffs and ultimately signed off on by the majority of them as well as VerStandig, Mark C. Mao on behalf of Stones, and Richard Pachter on behalf of Justin Kuraitis.
According to the document, the plaintiffs received a settlement of $40,000, which worked out to $645.16 per player before attorney fees. Stone’s had previously stated that the settlement was for a “nominal” amount, and while that might be true when compared to the millions the original lawsuit sought, it’s actually close to, or even more, than the plaintiffs stood to win at trial.
As previously reported, the original case was largely dismissed with permission to amend in order to pursue damages in the form of rake. To put another way, the only monies the plaintiffs could hope to recoup were those taken by Stones from the game in the form of a standard rake.
Assuming the game was raked at $5 per hand, and the games averaged a standard 22 hands an hour during the 68 streams listed in the original complaint, each lasting four hours, as much as $29,920 in rake could have been collected.
As such, the settlement seemingly earned the plaintiffs more than they could’ve expected to win, all without having to actually go to trial. Of course, they had to make certain concessions.
Postle Specifically Excluded
While the settlement was between the plaintiffs and both Stones and Kuraitis, the settlement was sure to exclude Postle from being a part of it all. Here’s what Section 6 of the settlement reads:
Upon receipt of the Settlement Consideration, Settling Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of their agents, successors, heirs, beneficiaries, trustees, spouses, executors, administrators, assigns, legatees, personal representatives other than their legal counsel, and any other person or entity who may claim through them (“Settling Plaintiffs’ Releasing Parties”), release and discharge Defendants and their current and former predecessors, successors, parents, affiliates, assignees, subsidiaries, insurers, trustees, agents, employees, officers, directors, and shareholders (“Defendants’ Released Parties”) from any and all liability, claims, counterclaims, demands, causes of action, lawsuits, obligations, attorney’s fees, damages, interest, and liabilities of any and every kind (including, but not limited to, those arising out of or related to the Action) based on any facts or circumstances existing up to the date the dismissal is filed, whether known or unknown, currently discovered or discovered in the future, asserted or unasserted. The foregoing notwithstanding, under no circumstances shall Michael Postle be deemed one of the Defendants’ Released Parties, and Settling Plaintiffs expressly will not release Michael Postle.
Contrarily, Kuraitis was specifically mentioned in Section 9: 'Kuraitis is one of Defendants’ Releasing Parties, and shall be a signatory to any long-form more formal written agreement produced pursuant to this material terms sheet.'
Statements Required
The settlement called for the Plaintiff’s counsel, Maurice “Mac” VerStandig, to release a public statement after the settlement became official. That statement, listed below, was agreed upon by the parties in the settlement.
After reviewing evidence with the cooperation of Stones, my co-counsel and I have found no evidence supporting the Plaintiffs’ claims against Stones, Stones Live Poker, or Justin Kuraitis. My co-counsel and I have found no forensic evidence that there was cheating at Stones or that Stones, Mr. Kuraitis, the Stones Live team, or any dealers were involved in any cheating scheme. Based on our investigation, we are satisfied that Stones and Mr. Kuraitis were not involved in any cheating that may have occurred.
While Stones has not spoken publicly regarding the details of their investigation during its pendency, its counsel and Mr. Kuraitis’ counsel have been immensely cooperative behind-the-scenes.
It has been an honor and a privilege to represent my clients in this matter.
In addition, each settling plaintiff was required to put their name to the following statement, which would be for public release:
'My counsel and I have found no evidence supporting claims against Stones, Stones Live Poker, or Justin Kuraitis. My counsel and I have found no forensic evidence that there was cheating at Stones or that Stones, Mr. Kuraitis, the Stones Live team, or any dealers were involved in any cheating scheme. Based on my investigation, my counsel and I are satisfied that Stones and Mr. Kuraitis were not involved in any cheating that may have occurred.'
Stones Gambling Hall Cheater
Not surprisingly, the settling plaintiffs also have an NDA in place barring them from discussing the terms of the agreement. Both Stones and Kuraitis had more built-in leeway to discuss, the former having already done so by releasing a controversial statement days ago.
If asked about this lawsuit, Parties and/or their counsel may state the matter has been amicably resolved. Additionally, Stones may release a public statement or public statements stating, inter alia, that the matter has been resolved, that there is no forensic evidence of cheating or that Stones or Kuraitis were involved in any cheating, and that it denies liability. Kuraitis will be allowed to comment about the litigation and the underlying events, but may not otherwise disclose the terms of this agreement and the forthcoming settlement agreement other than to say that he did not pay any money in connection with the settlement.
It’s also worth noting that the agreement explicitly states that settling plaintiffs are not prohibited from visiting or playing at Stones.
Stones Gambling Hall Poker Chips
Tags
Mike PostlePoker and the Law