Content on this page may include affiliate links. If you click and sign up/place a wager, we may receive compensation at no cost to you.
Appellate court denies BetMGM New Jersey online casino appeal in promotional event
A New Jersey appellate court rejected an appeal from BetMGM in a case allegedly involving the company allowing a VIP to enter a promotional contest late.
BetMGM remains in simmering water after a New Jersey state appellate court recently ruled against the company in a case brought forth by a customer who alleged that BetMGM allowed a VIP player to enter a promotional contest late. After BetMGM requested a dismissal, the court issued a three-sentence ruling that left open the possibility of the gambling company appealing a final superior court decision in the case. A trial date was set for March 6, 2026, in the Garden State's Atlantic Division superior court.
BetMGM customer: Operator allowed late entrant in promotion
According to the lawsuit, customer Larry Murk had entered a promotional event with BetMGM's PartyCasino, a licensed NJ online casino that would award $500,000 worth of casino credits and 100 free spins a day for a month.
At one point, per the suit, Murk had bet $350,000 as he attempted to finish first in an event that named a winner based on how much users bet versus how much they win over a monthlong timeframe.
Eleven days into the contest, however, Murk alleges that a new player – under the username MJBroker11969 – took over the top spot after wagering $800,000 after not appearing on the leaderboard at all beforehand.
After speaking with a casino host and others, that user was revealed to be a retail casino VIP who believed he was playing eligible real money online slots but in fact was not. As a result, according to the lawsuit, PartyCasino reclassified the VIP's play to fit the contest requirements, thereby vaulting MJBroker11969 to the top spot.
Questions surround terms and conditions of BetMGM
Murk argues in the suit that BetMGM changed the rules of the PartyCasino promotion but did not inform participants. Even if the company did loop players in, the plaintiff alleges, adding a new player midway through the event breaks the rules.
For its part, BetMGM says that its terms and conditions indicate that the company can alter the rules of any contest whenever it chooses. The general fine print notes that BetMGM has the right to "suspend, modify, remove or add any Gaming Service" at any time.
That said, those terms and conditions also stipulate that BetMGM can modify rules at any time "by posting the modified terms on the relevant page[s]" of the online casino.
The plaintiff, seeking $2.5 million in damages under the state's Consumer Fraud Act, argues that not such notice was given. And while those rules do indeed exist, it remains unclear if that language was in the fine print of the contest. During a deposition, a BetMGM employee noted that contest-specific terms and conditions should have been hyperlinked to the general fine print.
BetMGM, which also operates one of the top online casinos in New Jersey in the BetMGM Casino app, previously appealed to to the New Jersey Superior Court, though Judge Danielle Walcoff denied the request.
Written by Grant Lucas
View expert profile