Tiger Playing

About Tiger Playing

“This legislation failed squarely because Republicans refuse to say no to the president,” Arizona Senator Ruben Gallego said in a statement. “It takes 60 votes to pass a bill, and instead of spending their time twisting themselves into knots to appease President Trump, Republicans should have worked more closely with Senate Democrats to craft a bill that could pass with strong ethics provisions.”

Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis, the leading negotiator for Republicans, berated her Democratic colleagues in a statement, saying they “played games” and “were never truly serious about protecting consumers”.

“The Democrats are now anti-American – sad!” she said.

About Tiger Playing

While Alabama ranks 27th among the 50 states in population, the limited availability of gaming makes the state attractive to companies like VGW.

Alabama has only parimutuel betting, small games of chance for charitable purposes, and electronic bingo machines at three tribal casinos in Atmore, Montgomery, and Wetumpka.

According to its annual report, VGW generated revenue of $4.76 billion in its 2025 fiscal year, resulting in a net profit of $428 million. Despite operating in fewer states, VGW’s platforms grew profits and revenue from its 2024 fiscal year.

What is Tiger Playing?

Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.

IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”