Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Littlefield Corporation (LTFD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ed Pettee who wrote (5647)	12/17/1997 8:43:00 AM
From: T.K. Allen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10368

Ed: There is conflicting information regarding South Carolina's status in the class action case. On the one hand, The State publishes headlines that say things like, "Condon backs off raids - He'll instead join federal lawsuit to stop video poker", which implies that attaching themselves to a federal class action is allowable. But then, today's article says, "Lloyd expects U.S. District Judge Joseph Anderson to decide within the next three weeks whether the state can join the class-action lawsuit." Joining the federal suit doesn't exactly appear to be a done deal. Question: Is this the same suit The State mentioned in their June 17, 1997 article about some VP players filing a class action? That article states: "Among the laws the video operators are accused of breaking are: a $125 payoff limit; a $50 gambling loss limit; a five-machine limit for each location; a ban on alcohol service; and a rule that at each location the primary income doesn't come from gambling. The lawsuit also claims the companies have broken federal racketeering laws." Perhaps it is the "racketeering" issue (along with the class action status?) which has thrown this thing into FEDERAL court. I notice there is no mention of the "illegal lottery" contention in the June article. This "illegal lottery" claim seems to me to be a real stretch of the imagination, has no business being in federal court, and is primarily an attempt to create a bargaining chip for upcoming legislative negotiations. TKA