The Pennsylvania Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Nov. 20 regarding whether cash-paying electronic game terminals with embedded skill features qualify as illegal gambling devices under Pennsylvania law.
Shareholder Jason Levine, who filed amicus briefs on behalf of a majority of Pennsylvania-based casino operators, spoke with the Pennsylvania Capital-Star about the importance of the appeals, which have significant implications for the Commonwealth’s gaming industry and public revenue.
“The thing that all of the parties can hopefully agree on is that clarity is needed from the Supreme Court as to what is a slot machine and what is a gambling device,” Jason said.
The appeal followed lower court rulings that favored skilled-gaming company Pace-O-Matic Inc., which argued that its machines are not slot machines or gambling devices because they include a memory feature embedded in the game. The Commonwealth, led by the Office of the Attorney General and the Department of Revenue, contends the feature is peripheral and that the games function essentially as casino slots.
Share This Read the full article here