About this app
About Pucker Up Prince
“Given the pending Indiana case, I have asked my Treasurer to return the donations,” Grasso said in an email to Patch. His campaign reported the contributions to the Illinois State Board of Elections on September 14.
Rovito was among 22 people indicted in April in a federal case involving an alleged illegal gambling operation in northwest Indiana.
Prosecutors charged him with operating an illegal gambling business and conspiracy to collect extensions of credit by extortionate means. The indictment alleges that the operation involved sports betting and the collection of gambling debts.
About Pucker Up Prince
As the U.S. warms to the idea of online sports betting, the NCAA has taken steps to protect its athletes. Deputy General Counsel of the NCAA, Naima Stevenson Starks sat down with Calvinayre.com’s Becky Liggero Fontana to explain her organisation’s stance towards betting involving student athletes and maintaining the integrity of those competitions.
Stevenson Starks shared those concerns that the NCAA has towards online sports betting in the U.S.:
“The two [concerns] are the integrity of athletic competition, and how that could potentially be impacted by a proliferation of legalized sports wagering. And then the second is really the health and well-being of student athletes.“
About Pucker Up Prince
George Hasselback is done with Imperial Pacific International (IPI). The attorney has been representing the controversial and incompetent casino operator as it defended itself in a lawsuit filed by Fox Financial, as well as others, but has now washed his hands and stepped away. He had filed a request to withdraw from representing the company on February 12, and a judge granted his petition yesterday. Magistrate Judge Heather Kennedy agreed with Hasselback in his assertion that continued representation would put him in an ethical conundrum.
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.
