PA: Pittsburgh Area Poker Legality Lawsuit

[MayorHerb]

http://www.riverloc.com/

Burns was charged with running a tournament advertised on one date, but items and cash from another charity tournament were confiscated. He was not charged as of this post with anything regarding running that tournament according to his website. He is suing for return of equipment and cash from that tournament from which he was not charged, and arguing that poker is not gambling.

[ QUOTE ]

"...Burns and his attorney, David J. Millstein, insist poker is not gambling under state law because it is a game of skill.

Unlawful gambling, Millstein said, is defined as paying to participate in a game predominated by chance to win an award.

"Our position is it's no different from playing in a golf tournament," Millstein said.

Millstein filed a motion seeking to recover more than $11,000 and other property police confiscated from Burns' home and office and the Seward hall. The remaining money was seized Aug. 22 from a bank account.

Westmoreland County Judge Richard E. McCormick Jr. scheduled an Oct. 9 hearing on that motion.

The president of No Dice, a regional organization opposed to government-sponsored gambling, said it's ironic the state is cracking down on a poker ring at a time when it's luring gamblers to recently opened casinos. "


[/ QUOTE ]
Ironic indeed.

On what Burns is charged with, gambling devices, here is the statute:
[ QUOTE ]

§ 5513. Gambling devices, gambling, etc. (a) Offense defined.--A person is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree if he: (1) intentionally or knowingly makes, assembles, sets up, maintains, sells, lends, leases, gives away, or offers for sale, loan, lease or gift, any punch board, drawing card, slot machine or any device to be used for gambling purposes, except playing cards; (2) allows persons to collect and assemble for the purpose of unlawful gambling at any place under his control; (3) solicits or invites any person to visit any unlawful gambling place for the purpose of gambling; or (4) being the owner, tenant, lessee or occupant of any premises, knowingly permits or suffers the same, or any part thereof, to be used for the purpose of unlawful gambling.


[/ QUOTE ]

Now I'm just an interested bystander who also has to enforce these laws.

This is a precedent-setting case. Why is more attention not being paid to this?!?

Right now, it's open to opinion of the local authorities, the state police and the county DA's (and perhaps the PLCB with bars) on what constitutes "unlawful gambling".

[Grasshopp3r]

Thank you for bringing this case to our attention. As you are aware, cases that are under local jurisdiction do not hit the national scene unless they are reported. If it is a local matter, it is not immediately precedent setting to a wider venue until it is appealed to higher courts.

There should be a PPA response team that will deal with coordinating the defense of these types of cases as they will start to set precedents.

[IWEARGOGGLES]

Most of the PA Poker tournaments were shut down too because they kept getting raided.

I mean, they were only $60 tournaments but it was set up really well with lots of food, nice people, etc. Going to games at Oakridge and Sutersville really helped me get more into poker.

There is still a great 5/10/20NL game about 5 blocks from my house though. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Most of the PA Poker tournaments were shut down too because they kept getting raided.

I mean, they were only $60 tournaments but it was set up really well with lots of food, nice people, etc. Going to games at Oakridge and Sutersville really helped me get more into poker.

There is still a great 5/10/20NL game about 5 blocks from my house though. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


Check your phone for bugs and take elusive manuvers in any future trips to the game.... /images/graemlins/shocked.gif



D$D

[Skallagrim]

I agree that one function of the PPA ought to be to provide assistance to lawsuits such as this one.

I was going to bring this up at the fly-in - but am pretty certain I wont be able to make the fly in (damn, damn, damn).

Engineer, if you read this before I PM you, dont you think a good thing to talk to Pappas about is having a litigation support team? I can provide some help for free, and more if I can be paid (these things do take time) - but there is at least one lawyer already on the PPA board (AJ Shulman).

What I envision is a team to help local counsel in cases just like this where the issue is "skill v. chance." I have already freely provided the basis of a solid legal argument, and have worked with one PPA board member who is a pro-player who could be the star expert witness in presenting the argument. Seems to me other pros would help here too and other PPA lawyers. And there must be site gys who can provide statistics....

I dont envision the PPA going around filing lawsuits (like the ACLU), but being the central key resource for people who do find themselves in this kind of litigation.

What do the rest of you think?

Skallagrim

[JPFisher55]

Skall, I agree. This would be the first really positive step that I have seen from the PPA.

[Legislurker]

Maybe make a good attempt to troll 2p2 for all lawyers willing to work cheap or volunteer, or at least provide some advice. Gum up the courts. Didnt the PPA at one time state a goal of having all poker legal? The publicity of a trial with some corresponding ads in local papers could bea huge membership drive. If the money is there to start, it will pay for itself. Provided the PPA reforms to be appealing and stand up to scrutiny.

[Skallagrim]

Law doesnt quite work that way, LL. It is generally "unethical" for a lawyer to solicit clients, so you cant have the PPA going around looking for plaintiffs.

What is ethical is A) having a list of lawyers who are PPA members so plaintiffs and defendants, if they choose, can have some insight about who to hire, and MORE IMPORTANTLY B) having a central team of lawyers and experts who can assist any local counsel when these issues arise in a case.

A while back an unsung poker hero initiated a lawsuit in NC to get poker declared a game of skill. Only one prominent poker player/writer went to help him out (Roy Cooke, to his credit). A search of this forum will reveal a couple threads discussing that opinion and, most importantly, HOW THE LITIGATION COULD HAVE BEEN DONE BETTER HAD THE PLAINTIFF'S BEEN ABLE TO GET MORE HELP.

Thats where the PPA should come in. Whenever a "skill v. chance" case comes up the PPA litigation support team should be able to provide sample arguments/motions/briefs and coordinate expert witnesses in poker and statistics who can present the basic proof I came up with (and also posted in this forum) months ago and expand and verify it. Once a victory is obtained anywhere, the ball starts rolling our way, and we move dramatically forward.

As an attorney I know that the biggest difficulty in these situations is getting the right argument presented with the right experts. Usually a client and an attorney have no way of funding this kind of effort and so go into court with one hand tied behind their back(s). That is what the PPA could easily remedy by having the argument and witnesses set up and ready to go, hopefully at PPA expense, but at a minimum the expense to the client should be just expenses (no expert or additional attorney fees).

I have spoke with TE about this, and hope that the PPA leadership sees this as an important PPA asset.

Skallagrim

[Grasshopp3r]

This is something that the PPA should have on their website. The key is to make the arguments as visible as possible.

[sirfoldalot]

I think the thing that hasn't been discussed is that these games are taking a casino type rake. The cash games that form after the tournaments have a rake taken out as well. This is the main reason for the busts of the PAPoker games. A federal prosecutor plays in my monthly home game and constantly states that if you take the rake out of the picture a prosecutor won't bother with it.

Here is a link to a pdf article I put on my site when a PAPoker event was busted near me in WV back in 2005. The authorities even mention the rake as the factor.

I apologize for the quality...

Link to article (http://www.wheelingpokerclub.com/pokerbust.pdf)

[hick dead]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the thing that hasn't been discussed is that these games are taking a casino type rake. The cash games that form after the tournaments have a rake taken out as well. This is the main reason for the busts of the PAPoker games. A federal prosecutor plays in my monthly home game and constantly states that if you take the rake out of the picture a prosecutor won't bother with it.


[/ QUOTE ] so what if you did a time charge on a cash game but never touched the money from the pots?

[sirfoldalot]

[ QUOTE ]
so what if you did a time charge on a cash game but never touched the money from the pots?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is still a rake. From what I understand you can't even take $5 at the door for supplying food or drink. No paying dealers, nada.

[hick dead]

but why? it's a skill game and skill games are exempt.

[hick dead]

[ QUOTE ]
but why? it's a skill game and skill games are exempt.

[/ QUOTE ] why cant you charge a fee(time charge for the service you provide)?

[KEW]

[ QUOTE ]
but why? it's a skill game and skill games are exempt.

[/ QUOTE ]

The obv answer/question here is "who" said poker is a skill game thus exempt????

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but why? it's a skill game and skill games are exempt.

[/ QUOTE ]

The obv answer/question here is "who" said poker is a skill game thus exempt????

[/ QUOTE ]

By putting presure on the "Agencies" to tell Congress the UIGEA is unworkable, adds presure to the momentum for Congress to say poker is a skills game to take poker out of the equation and find some other way to beef up tie Wire Act if they want to stop unrestricted Internet Gambling.

While all that might not completely solve their WTO problems it would at least get us off their backs.


D$D

[oldbookguy]

I have tried looking and can find now our come on the referenced event, any idea what happened?

obg

[Skallagrim]

The rake issue only matters in some states (Texas for example). Not having access at the moment to my research, I cant say for certain about Penn.

In almost all states, however, if poker is a game of skill, then taking a rake or not is irrelevant. Some states allow home "games of chance" so long as the "home" does not profit - in those its relevant (if poker is a game of chance). Other states outlaw games of chance alltogether, rake or no rake.

Some states have specific laws on poker, though, and in those, again, sometimes rake is an issue, sometimes not and the skill issue is not present.

What a prosecutor decides to prosecute is not necessarily a decision about what is legal or not, often its just a decision about what is important or not.

In sum, if poker is a game of skill, in most states taking a rake (or a time fee, or whatever) is no more illegal than charging to play at a bridge club or a bowling alley.

Wouldn't it be great if you could just go to the PPA website and find this out for your state, or e-mail a specific PPA person with a specific question?

Skallagrim

[MayorHerb]

First off, it appears the gentleman is fighting on. Good for him.

http://www.riverloc.com has been updated with results of his first hearing.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/westmoreland/s_531820.html

Now, Poker as a game of skill. The arguments?
- Players are wagering on their own abilities than in a random event as players do in one-off games and tournaments in bowling, chess, darts, backgammon and pool as opposed to roulette, slot machines, keno and pull-tabs.
- Uber-Skill poker games are numerous, with a rake (e-pokerusa, worldwinner)
- The body of work by various players and experts in the field
(like the quote by Hellmuth about not playing $2/4 and below because "a good player" won't be able to "beat the rake")

Hellmuth: Play Poker Like the Pros: (quote highlighted)
http://books.google.com/books?id=cFqc8iA...t8GI4X4MyGiYPZQ (http://books.google.com/books?id=cFqc8iApfiQC&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=)

Final table proves Poker a game of skill:
http://www.pokerplayernewspaper.com/viewarticle.php?id=2152

[Skallagrim]

MayorHerb: I sent an email to the riverloc website with a copy of a formal proof I developed specifically for court litigation showing that poker is, indeed, a game of mostly skill. I hope it helps. People who undertake cases like this are the forefront of our cause (like Howard Fierman in NC - http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...art=1&vc=1) (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=10205719&page=0&fpart=1& vc=1))

In case its missed and can be helpful, you can also find the argument here: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=2&vc=1 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=9566359&page=0&fpart=2&v c=1)

We all should do whatever we can to help this guy win his case.

Skallagrim

[Steveinho]

i was at a game in the area a week after the fire hall in shelocta was raided... needless to say, they were pretty edgy about anyone, and everyone, who came late or was new

[oldbookguy]

good luck to him and us all.

in reading the latest article I was encouraged by the following:

[ QUOTE ]
During yesterday's hearing, Judge Richard E. McCormick Jr. prohibited District Attorney John Peck from referring to the poker tournaments as gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

full story:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/westmoreland/s_531820.html

obg

[MayorHerb]

He updated his website:
http://www.riverloc.com

The article below transcribed from this PDF:
http://www.riverloc.com/images/bulletin.pdf

Latrobe Bulletin
Wednesday, October 10, 2007

Burns wins a hand in his defense of poker tourneys
By Tom Aikens
Bulletin Staff Writer

Derry Township attorney Larry Burns won a hand yesterday, but the game he is playing with the state police will continue.

Burns, 63, (......) has been charged with violating gambling laws when he operated Texas Hold'em poker tournaments out of the Seward and Adamsberg fire halls earlier this year.
Burns will face a preliminary hearing next month on the charges.

...

District Attorney John Peck agreed to return $1,110 in cash found in Burns's dresser, $273 taken from Burns' pocket and $839 found under his bed as well as several books on poker playing and gambling. Peck said police couldn't tie the cash or the books to the gambling operation.

He also agreed to copy the hard drive of a computer confiscated from Burns' home to allow him to work on his law practice.

What investigators kept was about $11,000 confiscated in cash during raids of the Seward Volunteer Fire Department as well as what investigators said are records of income from the games and splits between Burns and the fire companies.

...

What (Burns' Attorney David Millstein) does deny is that it was illegal gambling; he said poker is a game of skill.
"If he is acquitted of a crime and there is a ruling that poker is not illegal activity then, yes, he will be back in business," Millstein said.

...

(DA Peck speaking) "Whether you win or lose, it's based essentially in the cards you are dealt and that's by chance," Peck said. "It meets the definition of gambling."

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]

.
.
(DA Peck speaking) "Whether you win or lose, it's based essentially in the cards you are dealt and that's by chance," Peck said. "It meets the definition of gambling."

[/ QUOTE ]

OK lets get all over this.

Hey Mr DA, please get 3 of your friends who think as you do and meet me and 3 of my friends who think you are full of it, and we will play as many sessions as you have money for.

/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Tuff

[Skallagrim]

Ask Mr. DA Peck to explain the hand from the WSOP where the guy folded pocket queens to a big raise by a worse hand. Tell me how the "cards" decided that hand.

Tell me how the cards "decide" any hand where everybody folds to one winner.

The cards, as opposed to the decision players make to bet, raise, fold or call, "decide" less than half the hands in holdem (and I can prove it).

This DA has never played, or at least has never played in a game where the stakes are high enough that folding is an important play.

Skallagrim

[Berge20]

Obviously we need to keep this on our radar.

Anyone familiar with PA politics give me an assessment of the possibility for the state legislature to react to a judgment in our favor by quickly "clarifying" or changing the statute in an unfavorable manner?

[JPFisher55]

I still wonder why this skill argument was so easy in my state of Missouri. I read the case on it in the Supreme Court. It is about what games moat in boat casinos could offer during the time that they were not legally licensed casinos under the MO constitution. The court took one paragraph to conclude that poker and blackjack were games of skill and thus legal, not lotteries, under the MO constitution. The opinion does not seem to reflect any real argument on the issue. Maybe because all sides knew that the voters would soon change the MO constitution to make boat in moat casinos legal.
Usually, MO is the stuck about 50 years behind on such issues.

[Tuff_Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
Ask Mr. DA Peck to explain the hand from the WSOP where the guy folded pocket queens to a big raise by a worse hand. Tell me how the "cards" decided that hand.

Tell me how the cards "decide" any hand where everybody folds to one winner.

The cards, as opposed to the decision players make to bet, raise, fold or call, "decide" less than half the hands in holdem (and I can prove it).

This DA has never played, or at least has never played in a game where the stakes are high enough that folding is an important play.

Skallagrim

[/ QUOTE ]

If this is going to be his argument, maybe here is the opportunity you have been waiting for.

Hey 2+2, take up a collection for Skallagrim to go help this guy out. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Tuff

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone familiar with PA politics give me an assessment of the possibility for the state legislature to react to a judgment in our favor by quickly "clarifying" or changing the statute in an unfavorable manner?

[/ QUOTE ]

I live in PA. It's hard to answer your question. The Legislature took forever to approve slot parlors and there are now whispers that table games will be coming in the foreseeable future. So the pendulum appears to be swinging in our favor. The governor is a Dem while the GOP has a slight advantage in the Legislature. No way to know what kinds of backdoor deals could be cut.

The only way anything happens quick is if there is money behind it so I guess that works in our favor because our opponents probably aren't the types to 'lobby' in this manner.

I'll keep an eye on the Philly papers and post anything of interest here.

[MayorHerb]

The case is now on the front page of the PPA website:
http://www.pokerplayersalliance.com

I have seen many mentions that Mr. Burns "lost".
"Pennsylvania judge rules poker a game of chance"
(apparently the site the article is from is not allowed by 2+2)

But these articles appear to be third hand accounts of heresay. To my knowledge, I don't believe there was another hearing since the one in which the DA was told not to refer to the games as gambling and that the Commonwealth returned cash, computer data and poker books. - See http://www.riverloc.com

A PDF of the case to get the stuff back is linked from the PPA, but here is the link:
http://ujsportal.pacourts.us/PublicRepor...%206:10:07%20PM (http://ujsportal.pacourts.us/PublicReporting/PublicReporting.aspx?rt=1&&ct=4&dkt=200737863&arch =0&ST=9/5/2007%206:10:07%20PM)

[chrisptp]

Thanks for bringing that story to my attention; it's on my site and it looks like the author pieced it together from some other reports that skipped over a lot of the facts of the situation.

I'm correcting it now.

[MayorHerb]

"The preliminary hearing for the charges at Adamsburg is presently
scheduled to be held at District Justice Mansour's office on November 9,
2007.

***All players and other interested parties are welcome to attend the hearing.***"

http://www.riverloc.com/

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
The rake issue only matters in some states (Texas for example). Not having access at the moment to my research, I cant say for certain about Penn.

In almost all states, however, if poker is a game of skill, then taking a rake or not is irrelevant. Some states allow home "games of chance" so long as the "home" does not profit - in those its relevant (if poker is a game of chance). Other states outlaw games of chance alltogether, rake or no rake.


[/ QUOTE ]

Here's one partial source for Penna law summary:

http://www.gambling-law-us.com/State-Laws/Pennsylvania/

My understanding is that the "don't take a rake" provision is part of Pennsylvania law, but I didn't locate it in that web page.

[MayorHerb]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's one partial source for Penna law summary:

http://www.gambling-law-us.com/State-Laws/Pennsylvania/

My understanding is that the "don't take a rake" provision is part of Pennsylvania law, but I didn't locate it in that web page.

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe the relevant statute is §5513, not §903, §5512 or §5514.

Specifically to §5513, what needs to be addressed is that poker is a skill game despite a rake being taken. A point that Pennsylvania does not yet concede to.

Current status quo in Pennsylvania (but not universal, check with your local law enforcement) is that casual home games are considered legal (Source: York Co. DA, Lackawanna Co. DA, Pennsylvania V. Silverman). This is generally understood to mean "unraked" and/or "small stakes" and/or "unadvertised". Player beware.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_sports#Poker

[Lottery Larry]

Thanks, I never would have looked for that under PA Sports

.. since poker isn't a sport.

[MayorHerb]

No argument, but I didn't add it originally to Wiki. just expanded on what I found there.

No need to get into game vs. sport vs. "Covered by ESPN".

I don't think it belongs there but I'm not much for creating new articles and moving content. And I don't know all the Wiki tags. I think I'll move it up as a question in the Poker project...

I couldn't find "Poker Law" or such. There's wiki articles on "legal gambling age" and even "age of consent" (sheesh).. but nothing on home poker or just poker law by state.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
I couldn't find "Poker Law" or such. There's wiki articles on "legal gambling age" and even "age of consent" (sheesh).. but nothing on home poker or just poker law by state.

[/ QUOTE ]

Try:http://www.gambling-law-us.com/State-Law-Summary/

I can not attest to the legal depth of the site, but I haven't found a major mistake there yet. But I am not a lawyer, let alone a gambling lawyer.


D$D

[MayorHerb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I couldn't find "Poker Law" or such. There's wiki articles on "legal gambling age" and even "age of consent" (sheesh).. but nothing on home poker or just poker law by state.

[/ QUOTE ]

Try:http://www.gambling-law-us.com/State-Law-Summary/

I can not attest to the legal depth of the site, but I haven't found a major mistake there yet. But I am not a lawyer, let alone a gambling lawyer.


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks.. I've seen that article. I've been trying to figure out where to put such type of content within Wikipedia. There was a stub I found on Pennsylvania Sports that had a quote from a story about a DA saying it was OK for home games and I decided to adopt it and expand it with other quotes I found. But Pennsylvania Sports doesn't seem the appropriate place for Pennsylvania Poker Laws