Evolution Stumbles in Court as Judge Denies Motion against C&K
A recent development in the ongoing legal battle saw the New Jersey Superior Court deny Evolution’s motion to unveil the sponsors of an anonymous 2021 report that damaged the company’s reputation. Judge John C. Porto ruled that the court could not approve Evolution’s request without further evidence, extending the conflict between the two companies.
The Legal Drama Continues
According to a recent report by iGaming news outlet NEXT.io, the New Jersey court has denied Evolution’s request, marking the latest development in a multi-billion-dollar defamation suit initiated by Evolution in response to the publication of the Calcagni Report. The report led to a significant decline in Evolution’s market cap, but the company has weathered the storm.
This anonymous report, published by New Jersey law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky (C&K) on behalf of an unidentified client, accused Evolution of receiving revenue from jurisdictions under sanction. Evolution has vehemently denied these allegations, labeling the report as “inaccurate, false, defamatory, and methodologically flawed.” However, the allegations were enough to cause significant stakeholder concern.
The New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (DGE) and the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) thoroughly investigated the report. The DGE concluded in February that there was no evidence to support the allegations against Evolution. The supplier filed a motion in March to reveal the entities behind the report, especially the unnamed investigative firm that is C&K’s client.
New Depositions Could Prove Vital
Evolution seeks relief for defamation, fraud, trade libel, and tortious interference. The company submitted its discovery request seeking the identities of the report’s sponsors in February 2022, and the case’s progress has been markedly slow. Industry insiders theorize that the mysterious entity may be one of Evolution’s competitors seeking to capitalize on the ongoing turmoil.
Although the NJ Superior Court initially granted Evolution’s motion, C&K’s attorneys appealed the ruling. The Appellate Court determined in January 2023 that further investigation was necessary, leading to the recent decision by Judge Porto to deny Evolution’s request pending additional evidence. Porto noted that depositions by C&K senior counsel Ralph Marra and senior partner Thomas Calcagni could have substantial repercussions.
Although the Plaintiffs believe… that this issue is now ripe, this court finds that limited discovery must continue and be completed.
Judge John C. Porto
Industry insiders will closely monitor the unfolding legal drama as the case could have significant repercussions on the broader industry, especially if C&K reveals the identity of its mystery client. However, given the slowness of the proceedings, any resolution is still a long way to go unless one of the sides produces conclusive evidence supporting its claims.
