CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y. (Legal Newsline) - Class action lawyers suing over change in casinos can't stack coins not paid to gamblers high enough to meet the standard for suing in federal court.
So says the owner of Hard Rock Hotel & Casino in Atlantic City, N.J., who recently filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit brought last year by Vincent DiBenedetto. The case says gamblers who put vouchers in machines to cash out only receive the full dollar amount, while the remaining change is not paid.
Under the federal Class Action Fairness Act, federal courts have jurisdiction over class actions in which the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million.
"Plaintiff has made a grave miscalculation," the motion to dismiss says. "Boardwalk 1000 has retained, at most, $434,002.99 worth of expired gaming obligations at the time the Complaint was filed.
"Even taking into account statutory damages, punitive damages and attorneys fees, it is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine that Plaintiff could recover $5 million."
According to his class action, which was filed by lawyers Spencer Sheehan and James Chung of New York, DiBendetto visited the Hard Rock Cafe in Atlantic City between June and October of 2022. He alleges that when he "cashed out his balances," he received a printed voucher with the balance owed and that when he cashed in the vouchers, he only received the whole dollar amount instead of the full ticket amount.
DiBendetto further alleges that when he received the cash-out vouchers from the machines instead of coins, he either inserted new tickets into the slots or discarded them due to "time, inconvenience and obstacles to redeeming them." He claims there is also no "meaningful" instruction available to players on where to cash in the remaining balance and that the practice "lures" customers to make more wagers while deterring them from waiting in long lines at cashier windows to redeem the full ticket amount.
DiBendetto also claims Hard Rock is unlawfully withholding coins remaining on cash-out tickets in order to increase profits.
The motion also says the case has no business being filed in New York. Boardwalk 1000 is a citizen of New Jersey with no employees, properties or assets in New York, the motion says.
And considering New Jersey's Consumer Fraud Act should apply to the case, claims made under New York's and Florida's similar laws should be tossed, Boardwalk 1000 argues.
"Fourth, the Eastern District of New York is an improper venue for this action," the motion says. "Boardwalk 1000 does not reside in New York, and no 'substantial event or omission giving rise to the claim' occurred in New York.
"Instead, nearly all (if not all) of the material events to Plaintiff's claims occurred in New Jersey."
Should the New York judge hearing the case not dismiss it entirely, they should transfer it to New Jersey, Boardwalk 1000 says.