DraftKings, FanDuel Sued in Louisiana Over App Addiction Claims
A proposed class action in New Orleans accuses DraftKings and FanDuel of using data-driven targeting to exploit problem gamblers and bypass self-exclusion tools.
DraftKings and FanDuel face a proposed class-action lawsuit in Louisiana alleging their mobile sports betting apps are defective products that exploit problem gamblers, according to Casino.org News.
The suit was filed in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans and demands a jury trial on claims that the two operators breached Louisiana consumer protection law. It also names Bally's Baton Rouge and Amelia Belle as defendants, since those land-based casinos provide the market access licences underpinning the DraftKings and FanDuel sportsbooks in the state.
The complaint centres on claims that both companies use AI-driven personalisation to keep losing customers betting, and that they sidestep or ignore self-exclusion and responsible gambling tools required under Louisiana's Sports Wagering Act.
Casino.org News reported that the lawsuit describes accounts of users who told company representatives they feared losing control, including concerns about being unable to pay their mortgage, yet continued to receive targeted inducements. The complaint alleges the companies use "creative, algorithmically-crafted inducements to keep people in the game, even when it is clear the game is causing those users serious harm," and that they "hook users and then use troves of user data to identify, target, and exploit the most vulnerable among them, specifically seeking those who appear to have gambling disorders."
The lead plaintiffs named in the filing are Adrian Payton, Toi Smith and Yolanda Perkins. Their attorneys argue DraftKings and FanDuel violated the Louisiana Products Liability Act, which is the state's exclusive legal route for product-defect damages claims.
Under that statute, plaintiffs must show a product carries an unreasonably dangerous defect that the manufacturer knowingly allowed, and that the defect caused physical or financial harm, through one of four recognised defect categories: construction or composition, design, inadequate warning, or breach of express warranty.
The lawsuit leans on the inadequate-warning category, alleging DraftKings and FanDuel failed to provide conspicuous, medically accurate warnings about the addictive potential of their betting interfaces despite being aware of that risk through their own customer data tracking. The plaintiffs are seeking recovery of all deposits made on the two platforms.
Neither DraftKings nor FanDuel had filed a response as of the report, with the complaint lodged on 22 October. Casino.org News said industry observers expect both companies to seek dismissal with prejudice, arguing Louisiana law imposes no statutory duty on operators to police how much customers wager.
Both platforms also rely on broad terms-of-service agreements requiring users to acknowledge gambling risks and waive civil claims. DraftKings' user agreement, cited in the report, requires customers to "indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless DraftKings … from and against any and all third party claims, liabilities, losses, damages, injuries, demands, actions, causes of action, suits," along with associated legal costs.