Minnesota federal judge denies Stake.us request to move gambling lawsuit to arbitration

A federal judge in Minnesota has ruled against Stake.us in its attempt to push a proposed class-action lawsuit into arbitration, allowing the case to proceed in court.

The complaint, filed in August 2025 by plaintiff Chris Wolters and seeking class-action status on behalf of other Minnesota users, accuses Stake.us of operating an illegal online gambling platform. Wolters claims he lost more than $80,000 using the site between April 2023 and February 2025, and later sought treatment for gambling addiction. The suit raises five legal counts, including violations of Minnesota’s consumer protection and gambling statutes, as well as unjust enrichment.

According to the lawsuit, Stake.us functions as a real-money online casino by letting users purchase two virtual currencies—Gold Coins and Stake Cash—which can be wagered on casino-style games. Players can then redeem any Stake Cash winnings for cryptocurrency and convert that into U.S. dollars.

Stake.us had argued that Wolters agreed to its online terms and conditions, which include an arbitration clause, when he registered. The company pointed to an internal screenshot it claimed was tied to Wolters’s account, and its founder submitted a declaration stating that accepting the terms was mandatory to open an account.

U.S. District Judge John Tunheim rejected that argument on two grounds. First, he found that under Minnesota law, contracts formed in violation of statutes designed to protect the public—such as gambling prohibitions—are considered void, not merely unenforceable. Because the complaint alleges Stake.us is an illegal gambling operation, and the company did not meaningfully contest that point in its arbitration motion, the terms and conditions could not be treated as valid. “If Stake’s Terms and Conditions are a contract entered into in violation of Minnesota’s gambling statutes, the Court must treat that contract as invalid and nonexistent,” Tunheim wrote. He also noted that the arbitration clause was part of that contract and could not be severed.

Second, the judge held that even if the contract were valid, Stake.us had not proven that Wolters personally agreed to the arbitration provision. The screenshot did not show Wolters’s name or otherwise demonstrate his acceptance. Tunheim added that, barring the illegality argument, a limited trial on contract formation would still be necessary before arbitration could be ordered.

“We are pleased with the Court’s decision and look forward to litigating this case on behalf of our client and all of the other Minnesotans who have been impacted by Stake.us’ illegal gambling website,” plaintiff’s attorney Vildan A. Teske told Minnesota Lawyer.

Stake.us faces similar legal challenges elsewhere, including a separate action filed in Los Angeles that also names streaming platform Kick and various gaming suppliers.