Recent DiCristina precedent not applicable, says US Attorney for the Southern District of New York
Black Friday defendant Howard Lederer, attempt earlier this week to leverage the DiCristina judgement that poker is a game of both skill and chance into a reconsideration of the civil claims against him has been opposed by US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara.
Lederer's legal representatives tried to persuade Judge Leonard B. Sand that the DiCristina judgement handed down by Judge Jack Weinstein had created a situation that merited further consideration of the Full Tilt Poker civil claims and the status of poker in terms of the Illegal Gambling Business Act.
Bharara despatched a written argument to Judge Sand in response to Lederer's appeal, asserting that the government does not believe reconsideration is appropriate or necessary, and pointing out that the Weinstein finding is not binding outside the eastern district of New York.
Bharara went on to roll out a precedent of his own, observing that in the criminal cases against e-cash processors John Campos and Chad Ely, Judge Lewis Kaplan had rejected an argument for dismissal on similar grounds.
The US Attorney also implied that further statutory claims that do not depend on the IGBA may be in prospect.