White v. Cuomo
New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
118 N.Y.S.3d 775, 181 A.D.3d 76 (2020)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
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…
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.