You thought you were just placing a bet. Maybe it started during a Sunday game, your phone lighting up with a promotional notification offering a risk-free wager or a deposit bonus. It felt like entertainment, like being part of the action. The apps made it so easy—bright colors, instant deposits, bets you could place between commercials. You told yourself you would stop after one loss, after one win, after this game or that quarter. But the app was always there, in your pocket, sending alerts about live odds and same-game parlays and boosted payouts. And somewhere along the way, something changed. The entertainment became compulsion. The occasional bet became constant action. You found yourself betting on games you did not care about, sports you had never watched, propositions you did not understand. You were chasing losses at three in the morning. You were hiding your phone from your partner. You were taking cash advances on credit cards.
When you finally sat across from a counselor or a doctor and heard the words gambling disorder, you might have felt a wave of shame. You might have thought this was a failure of willpower, a character flaw, a moral weakness. You might have believed you were uniquely broken, that everyone else who used these apps could control themselves but you could not. You might have wondered why you could not just stop, why you kept returning to the app even as your bank account emptied and your relationships fractured. You might have asked yourself what was wrong with you.
But court filings in lawsuits against DraftKings, FanDuel, and BetMGM tell a different story. The complaints allege that these companies designed their platforms using behavioral psychology and predictive algorithms specifically to encourage repeated, frequent, and compulsive betting. The lawsuits claim these companies had research showing that a significant percentage of their revenue came from users exhibiting signs of problem gambling, and that they made business decisions to maximize engagement and betting frequency even among users showing patterns of harm. What happened to you, the litigation alleges, was not an accident. It was a design choice.
What Happened
Gambling disorder is a recognized psychiatric condition in which a person loses control over their gambling behavior despite serious negative consequences. It is listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, the same reference manual that defines depression, anxiety, and substance use disorders. People with gambling disorder experience intense preoccupation with betting, needing to wager increasing amounts to achieve the same excitement, repeated unsuccessful efforts to cut back or stop, restlessness or irritability when trying to reduce gambling, and continued gambling despite mounting financial and personal losses.
What this looks like in daily life is waking up and immediately checking odds. It is betting on your phone while sitting across from your family at dinner. It is the adrenaline spike when a bet is live and the crushing despair when it loses, followed immediately by the urge to place another wager to win it back. It is lying about where money went. It is borrowing from friends under false pretenses. It is the sick, hollow feeling in your stomach when you realize you have bet money that was meant for rent or groceries or your child's school expenses, and the inability to stop yourself from doing it again the next day.
People with gambling disorder describe it as an overwhelming compulsion, a mental loop they cannot escape. They report feeling unable to tolerate the sensation of not having action, of not having a bet pending. Many describe a dissociative state while gambling, a sense of being trapped in a cycle they are observing but cannot control. The financial consequences can be catastrophic—drained savings, maxed credit cards, loans from family, pawned possessions, bankruptcy. The emotional toll includes anxiety, depression, and in severe cases, suicidal ideation. Relationships disintegrate under the weight of broken trust and financial ruin.
The Connection
The lawsuits allege that mobile sports betting apps are fundamentally different from traditional gambling in ways that make them significantly more addictive. The complaints describe design features that the plaintiffs say were engineered to maximize betting frequency and user engagement in ways that exploit psychological vulnerabilities and accelerate the development of gambling disorder.
Traditional sports betting required a person to physically travel to a casino or betting parlor, place a wager, and wait for the outcome. Mobile betting apps eliminate all barriers. According to the complaints, users can place bets within seconds, at any time, from anywhere. The apps offer in-game live betting, allowing users to place dozens of wagers on different propositions during a single sporting event—bets on the next play, the next score, the outcome of the current drive. This creates what the lawsuits describe as continuous gambling opportunities that keep users in a state of constant action.
The complaints also point to push notifications and promotional offers that the lawsuits allege are designed to trigger urges to bet. Users receive alerts about live games, odds boosts, and bonus opportunities throughout the day and night, which the litigation claims function as gambling cues that prompt betting behavior even when the user was not thinking about gambling.
Research on gambling disorder has documented that speed of play and continuous access are key factors in addiction. A 2017 study published in the journal Addictive Behaviors found that the availability of online gambling was associated with increased risk of problem gambling, particularly among vulnerable populations. A 2019 study in the International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction found that push notifications from gambling apps significantly increased betting frequency and were associated with markers of loss of control.
The lawsuits further allege that the betting platforms use algorithms to track user behavior and identify individuals showing signs of problem gambling—such as chasing losses, betting at unusual hours, or rapidly increasing wager amounts—and that rather than intervening, the platforms allegedly used this information to target those users with personalized promotions designed to encourage continued play. Court filings claim that internal data showed the companies were aware that a disproportionate share of their revenue came from a small percentage of users who were betting with a frequency and intensity consistent with gambling disorder.
What The Lawsuits Allege They Knew
The lawsuits against DraftKings, FanDuel, and BetMGM contain allegations about what these companies knew regarding gambling addiction risk and when they knew it. These are claims made in litigation, drawn from complaints filed in multiple jurisdictions, and they represent the plaintiffs' version of events based on documents they say have been disclosed or will be disclosed in discovery.
According to complaints filed in 2023 and 2024, the sports betting industry had access to decades of research on gambling addiction before launching mobile betting apps. The lawsuits note that problem gambling research has been published since the 1980s, and that by the time DraftKings and FanDuel expanded from daily fantasy sports into sports betting around 2018, there was extensive literature documenting the addictive potential of continuous, rapid-play gambling with instant results.
The complaints allege that DraftKings and FanDuel were aware of this research because both companies funded or participated in responsible gaming initiatives and industry groups that explicitly discussed problem gambling. The lawsuits cite the existence of responsible gaming pages on the company websites and the companies' membership in industry organizations such as the American Gaming Association, which has published materials on gambling disorder.
Court filings claim that internal company data would have shown the companies which users were exhibiting signs of problem gambling. The lawsuits allege that the platforms track every click, every deposit, every bet, every login time, and every loss-chasing pattern. Complaints assert that the companies used this data to build predictive models of user behavior for business purposes, and that these models would necessarily have flagged users engaging in high-frequency, high-loss gambling behavior consistent with gambling disorder.
One complaint filed in 2024 alleges that a significant percentage of company revenue—in some cases the lawsuits claim more than half—came from users who were likely experiencing gambling problems. The complaint references industry analysis and academic studies suggesting that problem gamblers account for a disproportionate share of gambling revenue across the industry. A 2020 study published in the journal Addiction Research & Theory found that in some online gambling markets, individuals meeting criteria for problem gambling accounted for up to 60 percent of total gambling losses.
The lawsuits also allege that the companies were aware of the addictive potential of specific design features. Court filings claim that DraftKings, FanDuel, and BetMGM employed behavioral psychologists and user experience designers who understood principles of variable reward schedules, loss aversion, and the sunk cost fallacy—psychological mechanisms that drive compulsive behavior. The complaints allege that features such as autoplay, one-click betting, and loss-back promotions were designed with this knowledge to encourage rapid, repeated betting.
According to complaints, the companies also had knowledge of gambling addiction risk from regulatory proceedings. When states legalized sports betting beginning in 2018 following the Supreme Court decision in Murphy v. NCAA, legislative hearings included testimony about gambling disorder and the need for consumer protections. The lawsuits allege that company representatives participated in or were aware of these discussions and made commitments to responsible gaming that the plaintiffs claim were not upheld in actual platform design and operation.
The complaints further allege that by 2021 and 2022, media reports and advocacy organizations were publicly raising alarms about gambling addiction linked to sports betting apps. The lawsuits cite news investigations documenting individuals who lost tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars and reporting that showed increasing calls to gambling addiction helplines. The court filings claim that the companies were aware of these reports and did not make meaningful changes to platform design or intervention practices.
What The Lawsuits Say About Concealment
The complaints allege that DraftKings, FanDuel, and BetMGM concealed the addictive nature of their platforms and the risk of gambling disorder through a combination of marketing practices, platform design choices, and inadequate disclosures.
Court filings claim that the companies marketed their apps as entertainment and fan engagement rather than as gambling, particularly in the early years of legalization. The lawsuits allege that advertising emphasized the excitement of being part of the game, the potential for winning, and the ease of use, while minimizing or omitting information about addiction risk. Complaints assert that promotional materials featured casual social settings and portrayed betting as a harmless leisure activity akin to watching sports with friends.
The lawsuits also allege that the companies used celebrity endorsers and partnerships with professional sports leagues and media companies to create an impression of legitimacy and safety. Court filings claim that these partnerships gave users the impression that the platforms were vetted and safe, and that the association with trusted sports brands functioned as an implicit endorsement that obscured the risks of gambling disorder.
According to the complaints, the platforms placed responsible gaming tools—such as deposit limits and self-exclusion options—deep in account settings where users were unlikely to find them, and did not proactively offer these tools to users exhibiting signs of problem gambling. The lawsuits allege that this was a deliberate choice to avoid reducing engagement and revenue from high-frequency users.
Court filings further allege that the companies concealed the extent to which their revenue depended on problem gamblers. The lawsuits claim that internal financial data would show that users with gambling disorder were the most profitable customers, and that this information was not disclosed to regulators, lawmakers, or the public. Complaints assert that if the companies had been transparent about the percentage of revenue derived from individuals exhibiting signs of addiction, it would have prompted regulatory intervention and public outcry.
The litigation also alleges that the companies engaged in lobbying efforts to shape the regulatory environment in ways that favored their business interests over consumer protection. Court filings claim that industry groups funded by DraftKings, FanDuel, and BetMGM advocated against restrictions such as betting limits, mandatory timeouts, and algorithmic monitoring requirements that could have reduced gambling disorder risk.
Why Your Doctor May Not Have Told You
Gambling disorder is underdiagnosed and often misunderstood in medical settings. Many primary care physicians receive little or no training in recognizing or treating behavioral addictions. Unless a patient specifically discloses gambling problems, doctors are unlikely to screen for it. Even mental health professionals may not ask about gambling when evaluating anxiety or depression, despite the fact that gambling disorder frequently occurs alongside these conditions.
The lawsuits allege that part of the reason gambling disorder linked to sports betting apps has not been widely recognized is that the technology is so new. Mobile sports betting only became legal in most states after 2018, and widespread adoption occurred during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Many clinicians are still accustomed to thinking of gambling addiction in the context of casinos, slot machines, and poker rooms. The idea that someone could develop a severe gambling disorder from an app on their phone, in a matter of months, is not yet part of the standard diagnostic framework many doctors use.
The complaints also suggest that public awareness campaigns about gambling disorder have been inadequate. The lawsuits allege that while the betting companies include brief responsible gaming messages in advertising and small-print disclaimers on their websites, these warnings do not convey the true severity of addiction risk. Court filings claim that the companies spent billions on marketing and advertising to promote their apps, while spending comparatively minimal amounts on genuine education about gambling disorder.
Additionally, the lawsuits allege that the companies have not been transparent with the medical and public health communities about the scope of the problem. Court filings claim that data showing high rates of gambling disorder among app users, if it exists in company records, has not been shared with researchers or public health officials. The complaints assert that this lack of transparency has prevented the kind of coordinated medical and public health response that typically follows the emergence of a new addiction vector.
Who Is Affected
If you used DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM, or other mobile sports betting apps and developed gambling disorder, you may be among those affected. The lawsuits involve individuals who created accounts on these platforms, placed bets, and subsequently experienced compulsive gambling behavior and significant harm.
The experience often follows a pattern. You started betting casually, perhaps taking advantage of a new-user promotion or a risk-free bet offer. Early on, you may have won or broken even, which reinforced the behavior. Over time, your betting increased in frequency and amount. You began betting more often, on more games, with larger wagers. You started chasing losses, convinced the next bet would get you back to even. You found yourself unable to stop even when you wanted to, even when you knew it was causing problems.
The financial impact may include thousands or tens of thousands of dollars in losses, depleted savings, credit card debt, loans you cannot repay, or bankruptcy. You may have lied to family members about your gambling or about where money went. You may have missed work, neglected responsibilities, or isolated yourself. You may have experienced depression, anxiety, panic attacks, or thoughts of self-harm related to your gambling losses.
The lawsuits involve users across many states, reflecting the rapid expansion of legal mobile sports betting since 2018. They include people of different ages, backgrounds, and income levels. What they have in common is that they used betting apps designed to encourage continuous play and developed a disorder they did not have before using the apps.
Where Things Stand
As of early 2025, multiple lawsuits have been filed against DraftKings, FanDuel, and BetMGM alleging that the companies engaged in unfair and deceptive practices, failed to warn users about addiction risks, and designed their platforms in ways that caused gambling disorder. These cases have been filed in state and federal courts in jurisdictions including Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey.
The complaints include claims for negligence, fraud, consumer protection violations, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs are seeking damages for financial losses, emotional distress, and the cost of treatment for gambling disorder. Some complaints also seek injunctive relief, asking courts to require the companies to change platform design and implement stronger responsible gaming measures.
The litigation is in relatively early stages. Some cases are in the motion to dismiss phase, where defendants argue that the complaints fail to state valid legal claims. Other cases are moving toward discovery, the process in which plaintiffs can obtain internal company documents, communications, and data. Discovery is expected to be a critical phase, as the lawsuits allege that internal records will show the companies knew their platforms were causing gambling disorder and made deliberate choices to prioritize revenue over user safety.
There have not yet been any trials or verdicts in these cases, and no settlements have been publicly announced. The timeline for resolution is uncertain, as complex litigation against large corporations can take years to progress through the court system. However, attorneys involved in the cases have indicated that they expect the volume of claims to grow as more individuals become aware of the connection between the apps and their gambling disorder, and as more information becomes public through the litigation process.
Legal experts have noted that these cases present novel questions about liability for digital platforms and the application of product liability and consumer protection law to app-based services. The outcomes may have significant implications not only for the sports betting industry but also for other digital platforms that use behavioral design techniques to maximize user engagement.
Individuals who believe they developed gambling disorder as a result of using sports betting apps and who are considering legal action are advised to document their experience, including dates of app usage, financial records showing deposits and losses, and medical or counseling records diagnosing or treating gambling disorder. Preserving this evidence may be important for any future legal claim.
You did not fail. You did not lack discipline or willpower or moral character. What happened to you occurred because companies built platforms using sophisticated behavioral science to encourage the exact patterns of use that lead to addiction, and they did so, the lawsuits allege, with knowledge of the harm those patterns cause. The shame you felt, the confusion about why you could not stop, the isolation and secrecy—those were not symptoms of personal weakness. They were symptoms of a disorder that the litigation claims was a foreseeable and preventable consequence of design choices made in boardrooms by people who had access to the data and the research.
The legal process is not simple and it is not fast, but it exists because the law recognizes that companies have a responsibility not to knowingly cause harm in pursuit of profit. What you experienced was not entertainment gone wrong. According to the allegations in these lawsuits, it was a business model that required some users to lose control in order for the company to succeed. You are not alone in this, and what happened to you was not random. It was, the court filings allege, the result of decisions that are now being examined in the light of the courtroom.