White v. Cuomo

118 N.Y.S.3d 775, 181 A.D.3d 76 (2020)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

White v. Cuomo

New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
118 N.Y.S.3d 775, 181 A.D.3d 76 (2020)

Facts

Article I, § 9 of the New York Constitution prohibited gambling. The constitution did not define gambling, but New York’s legislature had defined gambling in the state’s Penal Law to include staking or risking something of value on the outcome of a contest of chance with the understanding that something of value would be obtained in the event of a certain outcome. The term “contest of chance” was further defined to include any contest in which the outcome depended, to a material degree, on an element of chance or a future contingent event out of the contestant’s control. In August 2016, New York’s legislature amended the state’s Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering, and Breeding Law to include article 14, which purported to regulate interactive-fantasy-sports (IFS) contests. IFS contests allowed contestants who paid an entry fee to select fantasy teams of real-world athletes. The contestants then competed their teams against other contestants’ teams for prizes, with scoring based on the athletes’ performance in real-world games. IFS contestants could not control how the chosen athletes performed in the real world. Article 14 stated that IFS contests did not constitute gambling, based on the legislature’s determination that IFS contests were contests of skill, not chance. The legislature reasoned that IFS contestants used their sports knowledge and statistical skills in selecting athletes for their teams. Jennifer White and other New York taxpayers (the taxpayers) (plaintiffs) brought an action against New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and other state officials (collectively, the officials) (defendants) in New York state court, asserting that article 14 violated the New York Constitution. The parties cross-moved for summary judgment. The trial court agreed with the taxpayers that article 14 was unconstitutional and void to the extent that it authorized and regulated IFS. However, the trial court agreed with the officials that article 14 did not violate New York’s Constitution to the extent that it decriminalized IFS contests by excluding IFS from the scope of the Penal Law’s definition of gambling. The parties cross-appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Mulvey, J.)

Dissent (Pritzker, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 814,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership