The ongoing $9.6 million edge sorting case involving Phil Ivey and the Borgata Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey has a new wrinkle. A United States District Judge denied a request on Monday for a motion filed by the Borgata for a summary judgment against the card manufacturer Gemaco. The Borgata sought to have Gemaco held responsible for knowingly supplying defective cards to the casino.
Rule lands in Gemaco’s favor
Ivey concerned a claim brought by Phil Ivey, a professional poker player, against Genting Casinos. The casino had refused to pay him his winnings of £7.7million because they said he had cheated. Phil Ivey, an American professional poker player, played and won a series of games of Punto Banco—a variant of baccarat—at Crockfords Casino in London, owned by Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd. The casino did not pay out the £7.7m he had won, as they believed Ivey had cheated by using edge sorting. Ivey sued the casino to recover his winnings. Phil Ivey Continues To Strike Back At Borgata Casino - January 5, 2020 January 5, 2020 - Andrew Harmon Ivey and his friend Cheung Yin “Kelly” Sun carried out a technique called edge sorting where cards are interpreted as low or high based on imperfections in some of the cards.
Gemaco was the brand of playing cards used by Ivey in 2012 when he won $9.6 million playing Baccarat at the New Jersey property. The ongoing lawsuit between Ivey and the Borgata came from the Borgata in an attempt to reclaim the money won Ivey with the help of an assistant in Cheung Yin Sun. Edge sorting is a process of identifying flaws on the back of playing cards which gives away the value of the card.
The Borgata submitted the motion last summer and alleged that Gemaco supplied the casino with defective cards. According to Borgata, Sun was able to spot the defections on the Gemaco cards and supplied Ivey with this information while he played.
US District Judge Noel L. Hillman denied the Borgata’s motion while partially granting Gemaco’s cross-motion for summary judgment. The judge ruled that Ivey and Sun were responsible for exploiting any defects on the cards and using the gained advantage to win their sum. Judge Hillman deemed Gemaco not “liable for any tort claims” lobbied by the Borgata.
Judge Hillman granted Gemaco cross-motion for summary judgment for the casino’s common law breach of contract claim, of implied warranty claim, and of common law negligence. Gemaco’s filed their request for cross-motion summary judgment in October 2017. The company claimed the Borgata had no proof of the cards being defective.
Phil Ivey Vs Casino
The saga continues
The Borgata’s case against Ivey stems back to his fateful 2012 visit with Sun. The allegations against Ivey state that he defrauded the casino by winning in Baccarat by use of the method of edge-sorting. A 2016 ruling by Judge Hillman ruled that Ivey was in breach of contract against the Borgata but not liable for fraud. The ruling forced Ivey to repay the $9.6 million he won at the casino plus additional damages. Ivey appealed this decision and the case remains open.
Ivey was embroiled in a similar case in England against the Crockfords Casino in London. Playing Baccarat at the casino in 2012 with Sun as his assistant, Ivey won £7.7 million using a similar method of edge-sorting.
The UK Supreme Court ruled in 2017 that Ivey would not be receiving any of his funds back from the casino in a unanimous decision from five judges.
The casino denied Ivey’s claim to be paid out after the session concluded. The UK High Court allowed Ivey to appeal in October 2014. The Court of Appeal maintained the decision and Ivey was then given permission to appeal to the Supreme Court in February 2017.
What’s next for Ivey?
The ruling made by Judge Hillman in favor of Gemaco is yet the next step in Ivey’s case to keep the $9.6 million he won at the Borgata. Currently, Ivey and Sun are appealing the October 2016 decision made by Judge Hillman that Ivey was in breach of contract against the Borgata for marking the cards. However, that appeal is on hold until the Borgata is able to prosecute its claims against Gemaco.
/cloudfront-ap-southeast-2.images.arcpublishing.com/nzme/EL6XEC5XMCX4FSBKKIKPRCVX6U.png "Phil")
Borgata Hotel and Casino’s search for assets in its pursuit to recover a New Jersey judgment may find its way to a Nevada courtroom.
New Jersey’s most profitable casino won a lawsuit over poker pro Phil Ivey related to ‘edge-sorting’ in a baccarat game. This plan identifies manufacturing defects on the card backs. It allows the player to have a better idea of what the card may be if the deck is not cut properly, as was apparently the case in Ivey’s four Borgata sessions where he won approximately $9.6 million. The math did not support the likelihood of the massive wins.
Phil Ivey Vs Casinos
Bond required for appeal
The judgment is for $10.13 million. Ivey and his co-defendant, Cheung Yin Sun, were required to post that amount in a bond during an appeal of the decision handed down in 2016.
Ivey and Sun had a 14-day waiting period to post the bond. Both sought to stay the bond until the appeal’s process was exhausted. They were unsuccessful.
Borgata searched for assets
When the bond was not posted during the allotted time, Borgata searched New Jersey records for assets belonging to them. The casino was only able to find a single bank account in the state belonging to Ivey. It was at Wells Fargo Bank and it was empty.
Borgata then searched Nevada for assets belonging to the pair. A condominium was discovered in Nevada. It was acquired for $279,000 last decade.
Four businesses were located in Ivey’s name in Nevada. One appears defunct, while the others seem related to Ivey League. That was a poker coaching website that officially shuttered in May 2017. It has not posted a video in more than a year and its forum appears to have been abandoned.
One notable piece of Nevada real estate related to Ivey is not accessible. He owned a $2 million home in the Las Vegas suburb of Summerlin, sold in 2013 after a divorce.
Reports indicate that Ivey owns oceanfront real estate in Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. He also used a bank account in that country to wire money to Borgata for his baccarat bankroll. That may be of little help to Borgata. It is difficult for American countries to lien real estate and bank accounts in other countries.
Borgata hopes it can win a motion to docket the case in Nevada. This would allow for liens to be placed on identified assets that include real estate and businesses.
Not Ivey’s first court loss related to ‘edge-sorting’
Borgata was the second casino to get involved in legal action with Ivey after beating them at baccarat using the edge-sorting system. Crockfords in the United Kingdom refused to pay him after a large win. Ivey sued Crockfords, but a UK court sided with the casino.
These baccarat cases are not the only controversial situation Ivey has been involved in related to gaming. He was a house pro and investor in Full Tilt Poker, but the site failed to keep enough cash on hand. This was exposed when the company was indicted on April 15, 2011. This date is known as ‘Black Friday’ in the online poker industry.
Card manufacturer more successful against Borgata
Gemaco, the company that manufactured the cards used in the baccarat edge-sorting, fared better against Borgata than Ivey did. A judge ruled against the company. However, Gemaco is only liable for the cost of the cards used by Ivey. That amounts to about $27.