NORTH CAROLINA APPEALS COURT RULES THAT POKER IS A GAME OF CHANCE

wanbet-bc518

Decision follows a similar conclusion reached earlier this year in the UK

The North Carolina Appeals Court established a US legal precedent this week by upholding the decision of a lower court regarding poker in North Carolina, stating "...while skillful players can reduce the chance factor, they cannot control the turn of a card." Poker will therefore remain illegal in North Carolina unless new situations arise.

The issue dates back to 2004, when businessman Howard Fierman wanted to open up a poker club in Raleigh, NC. He consulted the former District Attorney for the area, James Hardin, as to the legality of such an operation and was informed by the D. A. that it was a misdemeanor to play poker in the state. This led to  Fierman losing the lease to the building where he had hoped to open up "The Joker Club" and led him to file an injunction against Hardin.

In 2005, the Durham County Superior Court heard the case between Fierman and Hardin. Fierman staunchly supported that poker was a game of skill, not chance, and thus wasn't bound by the statutes in place in the North Carolina legal system.  The Durham County Superior Court didn't agree, however, and on May 23rd of 2005, found in favour of the former District Attorney on the case.

Fierman persisted in his quest, however and in August of 2006, the case was heard before the North Carolina Court of Appeals. Noted poker writer and player Roy Cooke, Florida poker tournament operator Frank Martin and several others testified to the fact that poker is a game of skill over luck. While luck may prevail in a short term aspect, they stated, over long term expectations the skill of players will overtake luck.

Only one person testified on behalf of the State. Richard Thornell, an officer in the state's Alcohol Law Enforcement division, who stated he had played poker for almost four decades. In that time, he testified, while skill did have some effect on the game, luck was the ultimate prevailing factor.

In the decision rendered by Judge Ann Calabria and agreed to by fellow Judges Martha Geer and Barbara Jackson, the Court of Appeals pointed out that Fierman had not met the proof necessary to challenge the standing statutes on several points. As to the skill/luck question, the Appellate Court judges found that the claims of Fierman and his fellow testifiers didn't stand up.

In the decision of the Appellate Court, Jackson stated, "During oral arguments, counsel for plaintiff analogized poker to golf, arguing that while a weekend golfer might, by luck, beat a professional golfer such as Tiger Woods on one hole, over the span of eighteen holes, Woods' superior skill would prevail. The same would be true for a poker game, plaintiff contended, making poker, like golf, a game of skill."

"This analogy, while creative, is false. In golf, as in bowling or billiards, the players are presented with an equal challenge, with each determining his fortune by his own skill. Although chance inevitably intervenes, it is not inherent in the game and does not overcome skill, and the player maintains the opportunity to defeat chance with superior skill. Whereas in poker, a skilled player may give himself a statistical advantage but is always subject to defeat at the turn of a card, an instrumentality beyond his control. We think that is the critical difference."

"For the reasons stated above, we determine that chance predominates over skill in the game of poker, making that game a game of chance under N.C. General Statute 14-292 (2005). Accordingly, the decision of the trial court should remain undisturbed."

Earlier this year, a UK court came to the same conclusion.