What the Lawsuits Allege
Lawsuits filed in several states allege that sports betting apps are designed to cause or worsen gambling addiction and that the companies behind them use data and promotions to target people with gambling problems. The cases name DraftKings, FanDuel and its parent company Flutter Entertainment, and in one case the NFL and the data company Genius Sports. These are allegations. No court has ruled that any of these companies caused gambling disorder or violated the law in connection with addiction.
The Medical Diagnosis
Gambling disorder is a recognized diagnosis in the DSM-5, published by the American Psychiatric Association in May 2013. It sits in the chapter on Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders and is the only non-substance addictive disorder endorsed as a diagnosis in the DSM-5. A diagnosis requires persistent and recurrent problematic gambling leading to clinically significant impairment or distress, shown by at least 4 of 9 listed criteria within a 12-month period. A diagnosis existing is not a court finding that any product caused it.[1]
The Legal Background
In May 2018 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 16-476, striking down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, the 1992 federal law that had barred most states from legalizing sports betting. The decision cleared the way for each state to set its own rules.[2]
The Baltimore Case
On April 3, 2025, the City of Baltimore sued DraftKings and Flutter Entertainment, the parent company of FanDuel, in Baltimore City Circuit Court. The complaint alleges the companies use misleading promotions such as bonus bets to attract bettors and then use data and analytics to keep problem gamblers betting, in violation of the city's Consumer Protection Ordinance. The city seeks statutory penalties and a court order requiring the companies to stop targeting people with gambling disorders.[3]
FanDuel said it does not comment on pending litigation and that it is confident it operates in accordance with all laws, including those enforced by Maryland's Lottery and Gaming Control Commission. DraftKings did not provide a statement. These are allegations. No court has ruled on them.[3]
The defendants removed the lawsuit from state court to the U.S. District Court in Maryland on the basis of diversity jurisdiction in May 2025. Baltimore said it would ask for the case to be sent back to the Circuit Court.[4]
The Pennsylvania Class Action
Five Pennsylvania residents filed a proposed class action against DraftKings and other online gambling operators in federal court in July 2025. They allege the company used algorithms to identify customers with potential gambling problems and then exploited them, resulting in gambling addiction and large financial and personal losses. These are allegations.[5]
In March 2026, a federal judge in Pennsylvania dismissed DraftKings from the class action. The judge concluded that Pennsylvania law likely does not impose a duty on online casinos and sportsbooks to monitor or police customers' betting habits, so the negligence claims failed on the duty element.[7]
The plaintiffs in the dismissed Pennsylvania case filed an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in April 2026, asking it to restore their claims.[5]
The Massachusetts Cases
A lawsuit was filed in Suffolk County Superior Court in Massachusetts in March 2026 against DraftKings and FanDuel alleging the gambling apps are designed to cause addictive behavior.[8]
Two Massachusetts lawsuits against FanDuel and DraftKings were amended in June 2026 to add claims under the state consumer protection law, alleging the companies marketed to users whose behavior showed signs of problem gambling using promotions, credits, and VIP managers. The amended complaints seek double or treble damages. These are allegations.[6]
The Philadelphia Product Liability Case
On March 24, 2026, two Philadelphia men, Christopher Sage and Terry Thompson, filed a product liability lawsuit in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County against FanDuel, DraftKings, the NFL, and the data company Genius Sports. They are represented by the Public Health Advocacy Institute at Northeastern University School of Law. The suit centers on in-game microbetting and alleges the apps were engineered to maximize gambling addiction through AI-driven targeting, push notifications, and promotion of microbets. These are allegations.[9]
In July 2026, DraftKings and FanDuel asked the Philadelphia court to dismiss the lawsuit. They argue that Pennsylvania product liability and consumer protection law does not apply to free mobile apps and that the state gave the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board authority over how sportsbooks are regulated. DraftKings also argues the claims are time-barred. FanDuel separately asked to move the case to arbitration under its terms of service. The NFL and Genius Sports filed motions arguing they should not be part of the case. According to the filings as reported, Thompson placed about $23 million in NFL microbets and lost nearly $1.9 million, and Sage lost more than $170,000.[11]
Other Rulings
In December 2025, a federal judge allowed a class action against DraftKings over its No Risk and No Sweat bet promotions to move forward, rejecting DraftKings' motion to dismiss and ruling that the claims plausibly allege deceptive marketing. This case concerns how promotions were advertised. It is not a ruling that the app causes addiction.[6]
In May 2026, a federal judge sent a plaintiff's lawsuit against FanDuel, which accused the company of worsening his gambling problem, to arbitration.[10]
In August 2026, a federal court in Northern California dismissed RICO claims brought against DraftKings by gamblers seeking to recover their losses, ruling that public policy against recovering gambling losses bars those claims.[12]
What Is Not Known Yet
The record we track does not show whether the Baltimore lawsuit was sent back to state court or stayed in federal court, or its current status, though this has been reported and is not confirmed.[4]
The record we track does not show whether the Philadelphia court has ruled on the motions to dismiss and the arbitration request in the Sage and Thompson case, or the status of the Third Circuit appeal, though these have been reported and are not confirmed.[11]
The record we track does not show any settlement, any trial date, or any ruling on the merits of whether the apps cause gambling disorder.
Current Status
These are separate cases in different state and federal courts in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Massachusetts, and California. There is no MDL or coordinated proceeding. The cases are in early stages, with motions to dismiss, arbitration requests, and one appeal pending. The record we track does not show any settlement or trial date. For the full record, see our page on timeline and current status.
Sources
- DSM-5 (2013) (2013-05-01). Secondary report: psychdb.com
- Murphy v. NCAA, No. 16-476 (2018-05-01). Secondary report: lawsuittracker.org
- Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. DraftKings and Flutter Entertainment (2025-04-03). Secondary report: global.espn.com
- Baltimore v. DraftKings (2025-05-07). Secondary report: foxbaltimore.com
- Macek et al. v. DraftKings (2025-07-01). Secondary report: aboutlawsuits.com
- DraftKings promotions class action (2025-12-01). Secondary report: aboutlawsuits.com
- Macek et al. v. DraftKings (2026-03-01). Secondary report: playusa.com
- Massachusetts state court action (2026-03-15). Secondary report: wallacemiller.com
- Sage and Thompson v. DraftKings et al. (2026-03-24). Secondary report: bettorsinsider.com
- Arbitration ruling, FanDuel (2026-05-01). Secondary report: sportico.com
- Sage and Thompson v. DraftKings et al. (2026-07-15). Secondary report: torhoermanlaw.com
- RICO action, N.D. Cal. (2026-08-01). Secondary report: playusa.com
Litigation facts on this page come from the TortIntel litigation record and the documents linked above. Last checked against that record on 2026-09-20. If you see an error, tell us and we will correct it.