Steven Jacobs confirmed as plaintiff in case against DraftKings

The legal battle between DraftKings, one of America’s leading sports betting and gaming operators and an anonymous plaintiff suing the company over alleged extortion, is taking a new turn, after industry-leading publication next.io revealed that Steven Jacobs, the plaintiff’s lawyer, is in fact the person filing the lawsuit on his own behalf.

DraftKings and Jacobs fight over discovery

This comes shortly after Gadoon "Spanky" Kyrollos, described his personal relationship with Jacobs in a social media post on X, in which he also suggested that the lawsuit filed against DraftKings by Jacobs was in fact on his, i.e. Jacobs’s behalf.

Jacobs and Spanky have been also fighting with Jacobs suggesting that Spanky may have something to do with the attempt to be extorted in a recent attack by a masked man in New York.

Kyrollos took the liberty to correct those allegations and also denied that he had somehow received information from DraftKings or he was in any way involved in an attack by a masked man against Jacobs, then known as simply the "plaintiff" as his real identity was still hidden at the time.

According to Spanky’s X statement, he told Jacobs that he had access to information from within DraftKings at the time because the bettor was fearful that Jacobs had taken money that had been given to him to place wagers on behalf of Spanky and his associate.

Back to the case involving DraftKings, however, Jacobs has decided to reveal his/the plaintiff’s identity to the court in documents seen by next.io. According to the publication, he told the court that:

"Pursuant to the court’s order dated June 17, 2024, I write to inform the court that I no longer wish to proceed under a pseudonym."

DraftKings had already sent a letter to request a stay on discovery, which was originally requested by Jacobs, using Kyrollos social media statements and insisting that a stay on discovery was important as it could otherwise lead to the potential disclosure of confidential and proprietary information.

DraftKings also highlighted the fact that a significant effort, time, and expense would be needed to grant Jacobs’s request to dig up communications and documents that pertain to his account.

The company has described the request for discovery as both "overboard" and "burdensome."

As a reminder, Jacobs is suing DraftKings over the alleged attack by a masked man which the plaintiff argues was only possible because the company leaked his personal information that helped the perpetrator attack him in the first place.

DraftKings has vehemently denied the allegations and is preparing to file a motion to dismiss the case on August 8, hoping to not need to undergo discovery by that time.

"Spanky" versus Jacobs

Even prior to Jacobs’s admission that he was indeed the plaintiff in the case, he supposedly implicated Spanky in an extortion plot. Yet, the bettor fired back and offered his view of what was happening, detailing the relationship that Jacobs, Spanky, and an associate, Oscar Jones had.

Spanky said that Jacobs was a "whale" or a gambler who tends to bet big and lose a lot. He reached out to Jacobs to offer him a deal. Because Spanky was himself a skilled sports bettor with a strong track record of winning, companies such as DraftKings would not allow him to place huge bets, he argued.

However, they would be open to accepting big wagers from people like Jacobs – who bet big and lose big, Spanky explained in his X post. Yet, issues started to crop up once the money was secured. Jones supposedly gave Jacobs $82,375 and the duo told Jacobs what to bet on.

After a while, though, Jacobs said that a winning bet was withheld by DraftKings, and the sportsbook was refusing to pay up.

Eventually, a complaint was filed by Jacobs, Spanky confirmed, but by using New York's Freedom of Information Law (FOIL), it transpired that Jacobs allegedly sent an email five minutes after the original complaint to tell the regulator that he had made a mistake, and that the original complaint was part of a training module and to be disregarded.

Understanding where the missing money went

Then, Oscar and Spanky realized that Jacobs had been untruthful about what happened to the money he supposedly won from DraftKings. Spanky was himself not sure what the real reason for the missing money was. He outlined several possible scenarios as such:

"I believe one of three things happened: Either 1) Steve Jacobs wound up stealing the money, or (2) he gambled it all away or (3) he just booked our bets himself (instead of placing the bets at DK) - hoping we would lose.

The evidence seems to show that Steve Jacobs is either a sick compulsive gambler or a thief. My bet is on both. Either way, he needs help."

Spanky also alleges that Jacobs has told him that he owes people as much as $1 million in outstanding debt. The case continues to be an overcomplicated mess of mutual allegations and finger-pointing but one thing is now certain – Jacobs is the plaintiff in the case he is himself representing.

Meanwhile, Sports Handle reported that Jacobs is no longer an employee at Herbert Smith Freehills, the law firm he had been working at before the case gained notoriety.

Image credit: DraftKings