Published
October 4, 2026
DraftKings bettors who say the company fueled their gambling addictions saw their class action move through briefing at the Third Circuit in the summer of 2026, while new individual addiction suits against DraftKings landed in federal courts in Philadelphia and Chicago. None of the cases has produced a settlement, and there is nothing to claim.
Allegations Only · No Settlement
This article describes lawsuits. The allegations against DraftKings are unproven, the class action was dismissed and is on appeal, and DraftKings has not been found liable in any of the cases described. There is nothing to claim. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
The gambling addiction litigation against DraftKings is now moving on two tracks. The main class action, Macek v. DraftKings, Inc., was dismissed by a federal judge in Pennsylvania in March 2026 and is on appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, where the plaintiffs filed their opening brief in July. Meanwhile, individual bettors have been filing their own addiction lawsuits: DraftKings moved four of them from Philadelphia’s state court into federal court on September 16, 2026, and moved on October 2 to dismiss another in Chicago.This update covers where each case stands. For the background on the class action and why it was dismissed, see OCA’s DraftKings gambling addiction lawsuit page.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
Class Action
Dismissed · On Appeal
Macek v. DraftKings · Third Circuit No. 26-1903 · opening brief filed July 7, 2026
New Individual Suits
Four Removed to Federal Court
Rivera, Santos, Woodson and Evans · E.D. Pa. · September 16, 2026 · plus Miller in N.D. Ill.
Can I Claim?
No — nothing to claim
no settlement, fund or claim form in any of these cases
Yes, Macek Is a Class Action
Macek v. DraftKings, Inc., No. 5:25-cv-01995, was filed in April 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against DraftKings and two affiliates, Crown PA Gaming and Golden Nugget Online Gaming. The amended complaint, filed in July 2025 by six named plaintiffs represented by Loevy & Loevy, was pleaded as a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. It proposed three classes, each with a Pennsylvania subclass:• people DraftKings allegedly knew or had reason to know were gambling compulsively and still targeted with VIP hosts and other inducements;
• people who asked DraftKings to suspend or close their accounts and were still allowed to gamble; and
• people exposed to the app’s allegedly dangerous design features who developed, or could not control, compulsive gambling.
Judge Joseph F. Leeson Jr. dismissed the case, and the district court docket shows it closed on March 23, 2026. As OCA has reported, the court held that DraftKings did not owe the plaintiffs a duty of care to protect them from overspending or addiction, and that encouraging people to gamble was not “extreme and outrageous” conduct. No class was ever certified.
Where the Third Circuit Appeal Stands
The appeal, No. 26-1903, was docketed on April 21, 2026. Here is what the public docket shows:• July 7, 2026: the plaintiffs filed their opening brief and appendix, after an earlier extension.
• July 7, 2026: the plaintiffs also asked the court to certify the state-law duty question to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, so that Pennsylvania’s highest court, not a federal court, would decide whether a sportsbook owes its customers a duty of care.
• July 10, 2026: the clerk referred that certification motion to the merits panel, the three judges who will decide the appeal, and granted DraftKings an extension to August 27, 2026 to file its brief and its response to the motion.
The certification request matters because the duty question is a matter of Pennsylvania law that the state’s top court has not squarely answered for sportsbooks. If the Third Circuit sends it there, the appeal would pause while the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decides. The public docket available to OCA does not yet show DraftKings’ brief or an argument date.
Four New Individual Suits Move to Federal Court
On September 16, 2026, DraftKings removed four gambling addiction suits from the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas to the federal court in Philadelphia:• Rivera v. DraftKings Inc., No. 2:26-cv-07179, assigned to Judge Joseph F. Leeson Jr.
• Santos v. DraftKings Inc., No. 2:26-cv-07176, assigned to Judge Mia Roberts Perez.
• Woodson v. DraftKings Inc., No. 2:26-cv-07181, assigned to Judge Joseph F. Leeson Jr.
• Evans v. DraftKings Inc., No. 2:26-cv-07168, assigned to Judge Gail A. Weilheimer.
All four are classified as personal-injury product liability cases, and unlike Macek, they are brought by individual bettors for their own damages, not on behalf of a class. DraftKings’ removal notice in Evans gives a sense of the claims: it says the plaintiff, a Philadelphia resident who filed in state court on July 24, 2026, alleges he wagered more than $2.1 million on DraftKings’ apps, had net losses of about $81,000, and developed a gambling addiction along with anxiety and depression, and that he brings product liability and consumer deception claims seeking his gambling losses. DraftKings removed Evans on the ground that the parties are from different states and more than $75,000 is at stake. These are allegations, and DraftKings has not been found liable.
Two of the four new cases went to Judge Leeson, the same judge who dismissed Macek, though the individual suits plead their own claims and are not bound by the class action’s outcome until the Third Circuit rules on the legal questions they share.
Illinois: DraftKings Moves to Dismiss Miller
In Illinois, Miller v. DraftKings Inc., No. 1:26-cv-10394, is another individual case. The plaintiff filed it in the Circuit Court of Cook County on July 10, 2026 against DraftKings and Casino Queen, the casino whose Illinois sports wagering license DraftKings operates under there, and the defendants removed it to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on August 28, 2026, where it is assigned to Judge Manish S. Shah. The complaint alleges the plaintiff placed more than $2 million in wagers through DraftKings, that features like live in-game betting, parlays, bonuses and push notifications are designed to be addictive, and it brings claims for strict liability and negligent design defect and failure to warn, negligent infliction of emotional distress and unjust enrichment. DraftKings moved to dismiss on October 2, 2026. These are allegations, and the court has not ruled.Other Sports Betting Lawsuits
DraftKings also faces a separate class action alleging its Predictions app is an unlicensed sportsbook in states where it has no betting license, a different theory from the addiction cases. Prediction markets more broadly are under legal pressure, including suits against Kalshi and Robinhood’s sports event contracts. OCA’s sports gambling addiction lawsuit overview covers the wider litigation against DraftKings and FanDuel.What Happens Next
In the class action, the next steps are DraftKings’ brief, the plaintiffs’ reply, a decision on whether to certify the duty question to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and eventually an argument and ruling. In the individual cases, DraftKings’ responses to the complaints are the next filings to watch, starting with the briefing on its motion to dismiss Miller. None of these cases has a settlement, and there is nothing for consumers to file. OCA will update this coverage as the dockets move.Questions
Is there a DraftKings gambling addiction class action?
Yes, but it was dismissed. Macek v. DraftKings, Inc. was filed in April 2025 in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania as a proposed class action on behalf of compulsive gamblers DraftKings allegedly targeted, people who were allowed to keep betting after asking to suspend or close their accounts, and people harmed by the app’s design. The court dismissed it in March 2026, and the plaintiffs’ appeal is pending in the Third Circuit.
Are the new DraftKings lawsuits class actions?
No. The four suits DraftKings removed to federal court in Philadelphia on September 16, 2026, and Miller v. DraftKings in Chicago, are individual personal-injury product liability cases, each brought by one bettor who alleges a gambling addiction and seeks his or her own damages.
What is the certification motion in the DraftKings appeal?
The plaintiffs asked the Third Circuit to send the key state-law question, whether a sportsbook owes its customers a duty of care, to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to decide. The Third Circuit referred that request to the panel that will hear the appeal.
Can I get money from a DraftKings gambling lawsuit?
There is no settlement, fund or claim form in any of these cases. The class action was dismissed and is on appeal, and the individual cases seek damages only for the people who filed them.
Sources
• Third Circuit docket, Macek v. DraftKings Inc., No. 26-1903.• First amended class action complaint, Macek v. DraftKings, Inc., No. 5:25-cv-01995 (E.D. Pa., July 15, 2025).
• Notice of removal, Evans v. DraftKings Inc., No. 2:26-cv-07168 (E.D. Pa., September 16, 2026).
• CourtListener dockets for Rivera, Santos, Woodson and Evans.
• State-court complaint (Exhibit A to the notice of removal), Miller v. DraftKings Inc., No. 1:26-cv-10394 (N.D. Ill.), and its docket.
For more class actions keep scrolling below.
Status
Class action dismissed, on appeal · new individual suits pending
Class Action
Macek v. DraftKings, Inc., No. 5:25-cv-01995 (E.D. Pa.)
Appeal
No. 26-1903 (3d Cir.), docketed April 21, 2026
New Suits
Rivera, Santos, Woodson and Evans v. DraftKings Inc. (E.D. Pa., removed September 16, 2026); Miller v. DraftKings Inc., No. 1:26-cv-10394 (N.D. Ill.)
Court Docket
Macek Appeal on Court Listener
