Revel Casino’s Slot Machine Refund Offer

July 2015: The Boyd case was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice, the reasons for which have not been disclosed.

April 2014: The Peragine case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice, the reasons for which have not been disclosed.

September 2013: Another class-action lawsuit making similar allegations was filed against the companies. (Peragine et al v. Revel Entertainment Group LLC et al, Case No. 13-cv-5451, D. NJ.)

August 2013: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Revel Entertainment Group and Chatham Asset Management, who co-operate the Revel Casino Hotel in Atlantic City, for allegedly falsely advertising that they would refund all losses on slot machines at Revel throughout the month of July 2013.  The plaintiffs allege that rather than refund losses as promised, the defendants relied on their deceptively hidden restrictions to avoid paying any refunds. (Boyd et al. v. Revel Entertainment Group, LLC et al., Case No. 13-cv-5965, S.D. NY.).

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled.

When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled.

Tags: ,



Leave a Reply

Back to Top ↑
  • Search Class-Action Tracker



  • Recent Class Actions

  • The Class-Action Tracker is intended to notify consumers about false advertising class-action lawsuits filed around the country, but does not necessarily reflect TINA.org’s opinion with respect to the lawsuits or disposition of the cases

  • Sign Up for E-mail Updates