Published on: April 28, 2026, 08:37h.
Updated on: April 28, 2026, 08:37h.
Casino allows gambler to wager and incur losses, then denies jackpot payout
Court first rules in favor of casino regarding jurisdictional matters
New decision reopens legal avenues for players to claim winnings
In 2017, Monique Jewell entered the MGM Grand Detroit and reported that no one intervened. She gambled, lost funds, and eventually struck it rich with a jackpot of approximately $17,000. However, casino personnel informed her that she had previously been banned and would not receive her winnings.
For the last five years, Jewell has sought justice for her jackpot through legal channels. A recent ruling in a separate case in Michigan now allows her to take her claim to court.
Jewell participated in gambling activities at the casino on October 20 and 21, 2017, entering with valid ID. During her visit, she experienced losses before eventually winning the jackpot while playing “Texas Hold’em,” likely the house-banked game Ultimate Texas Hold’em, not the poker variant.
Upon trying to cash out, she learned she had been banned from the casino since 2011 and would not be granted her winnings.
In 2021, after receiving no assistance from the Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB), Jewell filed a lawsuit against MGM, claiming fraud and unjust enrichment. She asserted that she was never notified of the ban during her losses and that the casino should not enforce it selectively to their advantage.
Legal Uncertainty
The initial ruling favored Jewell, but MGM contested the decision, leading to an appellate court overturning it in 2024 based on jurisdictional issues. The court ruled that Michigan’s gaming laws provided the MGCB exclusive jurisdiction over disputes of this nature, effectively preventing the case from being heard in court.
Simultaneously, another case against MGM was underway, arising from an online jackpot at BetMGM.
Jacqueline Davis, a Detroit resident, sued the casino in 2021, claiming she won $3 million while playing “Luck O’ Roulette” in March 2021. However, when she attempted to cash out, she was informed that a software issue had invalidated her win, and her account was subsequently frozen.
Like Jewell, Davis was directed to the regulator, even as the MGCB stated it could not resolve the matter or award her winnings. The MGCB maintained it lacked the resources to mediate civil disputes between players and casinos; it was merely responsible for regulatory oversight and imposing disciplinary actions, which it opted not to exercise in either case.
Ruling from the Supreme Court
The inconsistency was brought to the attention of the Michigan Supreme Court, which ruled in 2025 that gambling laws do not impede conventional legal claims such as fraud or unjust enrichment, particularly when the regulator cannot adequately address the issue.
Although neither lawsuit has been resolved regarding its specifics, the ruling opens doors for both women and all Michigan residents involved in civil disputes with online casinos.
Following the decision in the Davis case, the Michigan Court of Appeals revisited Jewell’s complaint, now allowed to move forward based on the new legal interpretation.