Here’s what Section 6 of the settlement reads: 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. Of course, they had to make certain concessions.

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.Īssuming 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.Īs such, the settlement seemingly earned the plaintiffs more than they could’ve expected to win, all without having to actually go to trial. 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.Īs previously reported, the original case was largely dismissed with permission to amend in order to pursue damages in the form of rake. Mao on behalf of Stones, and Richard Pachter on behalf of Justin Kuraitis.Īccording to the document, the plaintiffs received a settlement of $40,000, which worked out to $645.16 per player before attorney fees.

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. Those who settled were barred from discussing the settlement, so details were understandably scarce. Last week, we reported on the lawsuit settlement between Stones Gambling Hall and 62 of 88 plaintiffs represented by Maurice “Mac” VerStandig.

Texas vfw gambling lawsuit settlement