Temporary Restraining Order on DC Sports Betting App Contract Extended

  • Last week's 15-day restraining order has been extended until October 28
  • Payment to Intralot for sports betting app development temporarily suspended
  • Order coincides with lawsuit over legality of no-bid contract awarded to Intralot
restraining order document and judge's gavel
A temporary restraining order on a Washington, D.C. sports betting app contract has been extended, delaying payment to Intralot, the region’s chosen app provider. [Image: Shutterstock.com]

Extension until October 28

D.C. Superior Judge John Campbell has this week extended a temporary restraining order on a sports betting app contract given to gaming solutions company Intralot. The restraining order will now remain in effect until October 28. A status hearing on the matter will take place on October 18.

restraining order will now remain in effect until October 28

The 14-day temporary restraining order issued last week resulted in delayed payment to Intralot for the development of the sports betting app. Now that the judge has extended the restraining order, the time window is 21 days. The first payment was due by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer to the company on October 1.

The change to the restraining order comes at the same time as an ongoing lawsuit challenging the no-bid contract awarded to Intralot.

Betting app contract controversy

The D.C. Council approved a $215m no-bid contract with Intralot back in July, with the goal of being the first in the region to offer the mobile sports betting option. However, the swift signing of the contract with the company which also happens to be the district’s lottery operator resulted in controversy.

According to VSO News, app developer Dylan Carragher began calling for a temporary restraining order of the contract. He argued that the no-bid contract illegally prevented him and other betting app providers from participating in the sports betting market. Carragher filed a lawsuit arguing that the procurement laws of D.C. must be followed by the District Office of the Chief Financial Officer. This would ensure a competitive bidding process for contracts.

Attorney General Karl Racine stated in a filing that the D.C. Council has broad legislative authority, based on the Home Rule Act, to change procurement laws as it deems appropriate. This would include allowing a non-competitive contract. The filing maintains that blocking the current contract “will cause the District to lose millions of dollars in revenues.”

The October 18 hearing

If Judge Campbell rules in favor of Carragher on October 18, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer will be instructed not to issue a payment to Intralot.

Donald Temple is the lead attorney in Carragher’s case, who stated previously that D.C. needs to follow its procurement laws, and that the process should be competitive and open.

Both Carragher and the District of Columbia are expected to appeal if the decision does not rule in their favor.