Public Health Advocacy Institute Wins Key Ruling Against DraftKings Over Marketing Practices

Public Health Advocacy Institute Scores Legal Victory Over DraftKings

On February 17, 2026, a pivotal ruling was delivered by a Massachusetts Superior Court judge, marking a significant moment in the ongoing class action lawsuit against DraftKings. The case, Scanlon et al. v. DraftKings, Inc., initiated by the Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI), has now cleared a considerable hurdle, allowing it to progress toward class certification, discovery, and ultimately trial.

Background of the Case

The lawsuit arises from allegations that DraftKings executed misleading advertising practices regarding its $1,000 Deposit Bonus promotion targeted at new sportsbook users in Massachusetts. Plaintiffs Melissa Scanlon and Sean Harris assert that the company failed to adequately disclose the intricate terms and conditions necessary to qualify for the advertised bonus. Specifically, to benefit from this promotion, customers were misled into believing that a mere deposit of $5,000 would suffice. Yet, they were required to wager at least $25,000 on specified bets within 90 days to access the bonus—a fact not clearly outlined in DraftKings' promotions.

Ruling Details

The court upheld most of the claims based on Massachusetts consumer protection laws, rejecting the bulk of DraftKings' Motion for Summary Judgment. This decision is particularly notable as it is the first false advertising lawsuit against DraftKings Sportsbook that has been permitted to advance past this significant legal stage. The judge described DraftKings' attempts to illustrate how the terms were disclosed as “recreations” generated using test accounts and graphic software. This lack of substantive evidence was pivotal in the judge’s ruling, indicating that the misleading nature of the advertisements warranted closer scrutiny by a jury.

Implications of the Ruling

Following the ruling, PHAI attorney Jacob Wolk expressed satisfaction with the court’s thorough examination of DraftKings’ practices, emphasizing that the judge’s comments highlighted the potential deception in the marketing strategy employed by the company. PHAI's Executive Director, Mark Gottlieb, remarked on the importance of this ruling, stating that it signals a resistance against misleading promotional tactics that lure consumers into a cycle of gambling dependence.

Furthermore, since the case is fundamentally rooted in public health concerns, this lawsuit stands to be a landmark decision against deceptive marketing practices in the gambling industry. Since the American Psychiatric Association recognized gambling addiction as a major public health issue in 2013, the implications of gambling-related harm remain relevant and urgent.

Next Steps for PHAI

With the trial on the horizon, the PHAI looks forward to comprehensive discovery that will reveal more about DraftKings’ marketing strategies and decisions. This process will be critical in understanding how their promotional tactics may have contributed to consumer misconceptions about the risks and requirements associated with their deposit bonuses.

Since its establishment in 1979, the Public Health Advocacy Institute has aimed to leverage the civil justice system to promote public health concerns. This lawsuit exemplifies their ongoing commitment to holding corporations accountable for practices that may endanger public well-being.

As a nonprofit legal research center at Northeastern University School of Law, PHAI continues to address various public health issues through litigation, ensuring that the rights of consumers are protected against unethical marketing practices. Those interested in supporting PHAI's mission can learn more at their official website phai.org.

Conclusion

This case represents a critical examination of the gaming industry's approach to advertising, especially in an era where online sports betting is becoming increasingly normalized. As the legal proceedings continue, stakeholders in the industry, from consumers to regulators, will be watching closely to see how this landmark case unfolds and its eventual outcome.