2:25-cv-575-APG-BNW MOTION HEARING - ROUGH DRAFT - DO NOT CITE!!!
57 resolution, one way or the other, the more Nevada consumers are going to enter into these contracts. And we agree, there would be some level of harm. We don't feel it's irreparable harm, but there would be harm to Nevada consumers that have entered into these contracts if the contracts, you know, get pulled. We understand that. They have money invested in them. And we also think that there would be harm to the State in that circumstance because then those consumers who may feel that they've been unfairly treated or, hey, these contracts were illegal, how can I get my money back, they're going to be coming to the State for recourse. And so the longer that these contracts continue, the more consumers are involved, the more the potential harm to the State builds. THE COURT: If the -- if Kalshi agrees, hypothetically, not to create any new contracts while this -- these issues are being litigated, setting aside what's been done in the past, would your client agree not to press for prosecution right now so the Court's got time to weigh these arguments and make a final decision, at least stem the bleeding from your perspective, we're not going to have any contracts going forward, and they're not exposed to the risk going forward, but at least we've got our arms around the alleged damage? MS. WHELAN: Certainly. You know, that's something
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Judy K. Moore, RMR, CRR
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs