The player’s lawsuit centers on her allegation that she won over $11 million by playing continuously, only for her balance to drop to $3 million, which she attempted to withdraw but could not
Michigan’s highest court is now checking out a major financial legal battle over $3 million in questioned online roulette wins. The story starts back in 2021 with Detroit local Jacqueline Davis, who says she won millions playing BetMGM’s online Luck O’ the Roulette game for five days straight. However, the casino does not agree saying those wins were not real because their software messed up.
Legal Battle Over $3M Winnings Sparks Debate on Michigan’s Internet Gaming Law
Davis’s lawsuit revolves around her claim that she won more than $11 million by playing nonstop before her balance fell to $3 million — a sum she tried to withdraw. At first, she got a $100,000 advance at the MGM Grand Detroit, but when she tried to get the rest of her money, they said no. BetMGM later claimed a glitch in the game had boosted her winnings making the payout invalid.
This argument has raised a bigger legal question: Does Michigan’s Lawful Internet Gaming Act (LIGA) stop Davis from taking her case to court?
The lower courts ruled in favor of BetMGM. They decided that Davis’s fraud and contract claims were preempted by LIGA. The courts said LIGA gives the Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB) full responsibility for internet gaming disputes. Davis challenged this decision. She claimed her allegations stem from common law and do not clash with LIGA’s structure.
Davis’s lawyer argued her case to the Michigan Supreme Court. He stated the MGCB does not have the power or setup to solve civil disputes like hers. He pointed out that LIGA has a clause that keeps consistent common law claims intact. He argued that this includes her claims of fraud and conversion.
MGCB Brief Supports Player’s Claim, But BetMGM Defends Action Under LIGA in Legal Battle
Adding to the complexity of the case is a supporting brief from the MGCB, which seems to back up Davis’s claim — saying the board cannot settle these private disputes. This stance surprised the justices during oral arguments, who asked if an agency can lack power over issues the law gives it.
At the same time, BetMGM says it handled the matter under current rules. The company argues it stuck to LIGA rules and its user agreement, which both let bets be canceled if something goes wrong. The platform says Davis should have filed a complaint with the MGCB, which she did — but she did not get any official decision on her claims.
The court’s upcoming verdict might spell out the limits between bureaucratic control and access to civil courts in Michigan’s booming online betting scene. We can expect a ruling to come down later this year.
