About this app
How to play Rocky
The law came at the request of Full House Resorts, the Las Vegas-based regional gaming operator that expressed interest in relocating its Rising Star Casino in Rising Sun to a more attractive market, specifically in the northeastern part of the state.
During the lawmaking process, Full House’s exclusivity was stripped in favor of welcoming any company currently licensed as a commercial casino in the US to bid on the possible license. Lawmakers also threw in a one-time $150 million fee for the concession and a mandatory investment minimum of $500 million, all but ending Full House’s interest.
“The bill changed many times. We make money in Rising Sun. We always have, not a lot of money, but we make money. We continue to make money in Rising Sun. And we will continue to do that for our shareholders, as well as for the good of the state,” Full House CEO Daniel Lee said in March.
What is Rocky?
We mentioned that southern border because German players apparently enjoy the Holland Casino offering too. “German visitors are really interested because we have a different offer from most of the German casinos,” Petra explains.
“If you look at our land-based casinos, it’s table games, slots, in some cases bingo, and on some evenings, poker. But there are also restaurants, entertainment. It’s an afternoon or evening out. And as I understand from our German guests, it’s a more entertaining evening or afternoon than in some German casinos.”
The company’s offering in the south does not differ markedly from elsewhere in the country, though – the base offering remains the same: “We always have slots, we always have table games like roulette and blackjack, and we always have at least one restaurant, sometimes two.”
What is Rocky?
Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”
Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.
IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”
