A former Jacksonville Jaguars executive who admitted to embezzling$ 22 million from the team sued FanDuel and three of its business partners ( Flutter Entertainment, Boyd Gaming, and Fox ) on Tuesday for$ 250 million as Congress weighs a new bill that would increase regulation of sports betting on the basis of public health concerns.
Amit Patel’s 30-page problem, filed in the Southern District of New York, accuses the accused of neglect, intentional infliction of emotional distress, crime, and dishonest and unfair trade practices. Patel, who claims he allegedly spent more than$ 20 million on daily fantasy sports between 2019 and 2023, alleges that the defendants knew that he was an addicted gambler because they had access to and monitored his deposits and data regarding his betting frequency. Through his lawyer, Matthew R. Litt, Patel charges the accused “preyed on” him by luring him with” FanDuel credits and beautiful products” and so exploited his habit.
Patel likewise contends that despite responsible gambling practices used by sports betting companies to identify and prevent problem gambling, he was instructed on how to bargain FanDuel funds in his account rather than withdraw it” to avoid fear.” He also contends that the defendants “knew” that he was an obsessed casino and wanted to keep him gambling on FanDuel’s site in greater numbers and frequency to make him do so.
Last December, Patel pleaded guilty to embezzling$ 22.2 million from the Jaguars, and in March, U. S. District Judge Henry L. Adams sentenced Patel to six years and six months in federal prison for committing line scams and engaging in an illegal financial transaction. Patel fabricated false data to trick the team’s finance ministry after taking advantage of his part as superintendent of the Jaguars ‘ virtual credit card program, which regulates supplier payments and purchase orders.
FanDuel, which declined reply, and the other defendants did answer the problem and motion for its termination. They may claim that the lawsuit is unfeigned and that Patel is trying to blame others for his own wrongdoing, including criminal behavior. Patel, who is in his early 30s and not a kid or elderly, would likely challenge to show that he is not ultimately responsible for his decisions to imagine and commit crimes even if he could create that business plans were violated and that he was induced by ads.
In addition to the hard conflict, the plaintiff must establish that the company had a legal obligation to the claimant and that there is a sufficient direct connection between the business and the alleged harm. Dispute against McDonald’s for causing overweight, for example, was fruitless, though litigation against cigarette companies ultimately proved successful.
Patel’s event arrives after September’s launch of the SAFE Bet Act in Congress. The Act seeks to, among other things, restrict how sports betting businesses advertise to users.