FOLLOW US

Wynn Resorts is fighting an uphill legal battle to maintain its triumph in a class-action lawsuit lodged against it. The controversy centers around whether Wynn's Encore Boston Harbor Resort unjustly benefits from the unclaimed change when slot machine players redeem their tickets. In a fierce legal tussle, Wynn Resorts Holdings LLC and its affiliates are appealing for the First Circuit's support.

Challenging the Class Action Fairness Act

A. Richard Schuster, the aggrieved patron, has taken his case to the appellate court, aiming to reverse the lower court's verdict. He alleges that Encore Boston Harbor Resort retains the leftover funds, asserting it's an illegal practice. However, Wynn Resorts maintains that Schuster offers no new legal arguments regarding the court's jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act.

Clear Redemption Instructions and Regulatory Compliance

Wynn Resorts and its affiliates argue that Schuster was provided with clear instructions for redeeming his winnings every time he visited the Encore resort in Boston. Moreover, they contend that Encore, a highly-regulated establishment, is permitted to configure its ticket redemption units in a specific manner, enabling it to dispense cash along with TRU (Ticket Redemption Unit) vouchers for change less than one dollar.

Wynn Resorts Casino Slot Suit: An Uphill Legal Battle

Wynn Resorts vehemently supports its stance. "The summary-judgment record is clear that the district court correctly determined that the challenged TRU practice was, as a matter of law, neither unfair nor deceptive," the company stated. "The challenged TRU practice is expressly permitted by the governing legal standard and was approved by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission's Investigations and Enforcement Bureau."

The Appeal and District Court's Decision

Schuster's appeal to the appellate body comes just a month after a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled against him. The judge determined that Schuster couldn't substantiate his claims that the casino's use of the bill-plus-voucher system, instead of exact change, violated industry norms, internal controls, or Massachusetts gaming regulations.

Allegations of "Stealing" and Industry Norms

Schuster, a resident of New York, accused the casino of "stealing" from gamblers by not providing exact change when cashing out slot machine vouchers. He claimed that this practice amounted to the casino cheating at blackjack. However, the judge found that industry norms do not apply to the cashout kiosks, contrary to Schuster's assertions.

Wynn Resorts Casino Slot Suit: Clear Instructions on Tickets

Wynn Resorts' defense maintains that they provided clear instructions on their tickets, stating, "please take receipt to cashier," for players who wished to redeem both cash and coins. They argue that there was no deception in this matter, as Schuster had clear directions on how to redeem his winnings at ticket redemption units.

Wynn Resorts Casino Slot Suit: Outcome Uncertain

As the legal battle rages on, the First Circuit will determine whether Wynn Resorts should uphold its victory or if Schuster's appeal will shift the tide in his favor. This thrilling legal saga keeps us in suspense as these casino giants clash in the courtroom.

Representatives for both Wynn Resorts and Schuster were not immediately available for comment.

Schuster is represented by Joshua N. Garick of the Law Offices of Joshua N. Garick PC and David Pastor of Pastor Law Office LLP. Wynn Resorts is represented by Joshua P. Dunn and Wayne F. Dennison of Brown Rudnick LLP.

Wynn Resorts Casino Slot Suit: Case Details

The case in question is Schuster v. Wynn MA LLC et al., case number 23-1291, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The underlying case is Schuster v. Encore Boston Harbor et al., case number 1:19-cv-11679, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.