LANSING (AP) — Charitable poker events in Michigan will face stricter rules following a recent Michigan Court of Appeals decision.
The court overturned at 2014 injunction from Court of Claims Judge Pat Donofrio. That injunction had barred the state from enforcing rules issued last May by the Michigan Gaming Control Board significantly restricting charitable poker events.
The board said those rules were aimed at assuring gambling operators don’t exploit charities for their own profit.
The Michigan Charitable Gaming Association and several charities sued, saying the rules would cost millions of dollars in revenue.
Writing for the majority in the 2-1 Court of Appeals opinion, Judge Jane Beckering said the process by which the rules were adopted was appropriate.
Katharine Hude, executive director of the Charitable Gaming Association, said the group was considering “the next best course of action for its members.”
The Gaming Control Board released a statement praising the Court of Appeals decision.
Richard Kalm, executive director of the Gaming Control Board, said the decision will ensure the “integrity of gaming and the future of millionaire parties as a fundraising option for charities.”
“The court recognized our ability to change the rules in response to legislative input,” he said.
The Charitable Gaming Association had challenged the rules on another issue that wasn’t considered. The Court of Claims may still consider that issue.
- Posted June 04, 2015
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Charity poker events to face stricter rules
headlines Macomb
headlines National
- Play-Based Learning: Can simulation games help lawyers learn management and business development skills?
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Court orders hospital to resume gender-affirming care for transgender kids
- Netflix’s ‘The Lincoln Lawyer’ will rest his case at end of season 5
- Woman gives birth during arraignment in NYC courtroom
- SCOTUS will examine scope of Title IX protections and whether civil rights law covers work bias claims




