Jump to content

Vest v DraftKings Inc

From AI Law Wiki

AI-generated text. This page was generated using artificial intelligence.

Case Information
Case name Vest v. DraftKings, Inc.[1]
Court United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts[1]
Docket 1:26-cv-14462-BEM[1]
Filed September 30, 2026[1]
Judge(s) Not identified in the filed complaint.
Plaintiff Daniel Vest, individually and on behalf of a proposed class[1]
Defendant DraftKings, Inc.[1]
Case type Proposed consumer class action over AI-assisted gambling promotions and personal-data use[1]
Claims / issues Breach of contract, breach of implied contract and money had and received; alleged targeting of users likely to lose more when offered promotions[1]
Status Complaint filed September 30, 2026; class certification and liability have not been decided in the records reviewed.[1]

Vest v. DraftKings, Inc. is a proposed federal class action in Massachusetts concerning the alleged use of a machine-learning model to target gambling customers with promotions. Daniel Vest filed the complaint on September 30, 2026. DraftKings denies using AI to target customers based on losses or signs of problem gambling and says it intends to defend the suit.[1][2]

Allegations and claims

Vest alleges that DraftKings developed a model using customer betting records to predict who would gamble and lose more after receiving promotions. He says he received at least approximately 70 promotional emails, texts or other messages in the month before September 25. The complaint relies in part on a September 19 New York Times investigation; the model's alleged use and its effects remain contested.[1][2]

The complaint argues that DraftKings' alleged use of customer information conflicted with responsible-play statements in its privacy notices. It asserts three nonstatutory claims: breach of contract, breach of implied contract and money had and received. Although the filing discusses Massachusetts sports-wagering data rules, it expressly says it does not yet assert a Massachusetts consumer-protection statute claim. Vest seeks class certification, damages, restitution and an injunction against the alleged targeting practice.[1]

Procedural status

The September 30 complaint starts the action and proposes a class; it is not a certified class or a finding that DraftKings used the alleged model. The filed complaint is the latest substantive court document verified for this article. WBUR reported DraftKings' denial on October 1.[1][2]

References