A New Jersey court recently rejected Ivey’s appeal for a final judgment in his ongoing legal battle with Borgata Casino in Atlantic City, NJ. The judge said Ivey cannot pursue an appeal until Borgata’s related case against Gemaco Inc. reaches a resolution.
The legal battles between Ivey, Borgata, and Gemaco all stem from some 2012 baccarat sessions Ivey played at the New Jersey casino. He managed to win millions of dollars using a questionably ethical technique called edge-sorting.
December court ruling said Ivey needs to return $10 million to NJ casino
In December of last year, a US District Court Judge ruled Ivey needed to pay Borgata $10.1 million. The sum consisted of his winnings from Baccarat as well as profits from a craps session played using those winnings.
The strange part of the ruling is that the judge conceded Ivey did not cheat per se. Rather, he and his companion observed small imperfections in the backs of the cards they were playing with to their advantage.
The judge ruled this breached the contract between casino and patron. As a result, Ivey needs to return the money to Borgata.
Ivey denied expedited appeal
Following the ruling, Ivey’s legal team filed for a final judgment in the case. By rushing to finalize the ruling, Ivey’s legal team could immediately appeal the District Court ruling to the US Court of Appeals.
This would help Ivey. The longer the appeal takes to file, the more likely Ivey will be expected to pay back some or all of the $10 million judgment.
Unfortunately for him, the court turned down the motion this week. NorthJersey.com recently reported Ivey cannot appeal his case until Borgata’s related case with Gemaco is resolved.
One of the reasons cited in the ruling for making Ivey wait is that the Gemaco case covers the same territory as Ivey’s case did. Instead of possibly dealing with dual appeals, Ivey has to wait to see how the courts treat Gemaco.
Ivey baccarat case in London pending final appeal
Meanwhile, Ivey’s other edge-sorting case awaits final appeal in England. Ivey has a similar legal situation with Crockford’s, a London casino. The key difference is Crockford’s refused to pay Ivey his £7.8 million in winnings. Ivey sued. He lost every appeal so far. However, England’s Supreme Court agreed to let him appeal his case to the highest court in the land.[i15-table tableid=5268]