A reminder to agree all terms upfront in staking deals (including cancellations), as a major staking dispute is playing out in a Nevada court.

Nick Marchington

21-year-old British professional Nick Marchington took down $1,525,000 for his 7th place finish in the Main Event this year (tax free) but now may have to give a sizable chunk of that away.

David Yee and Colin Hartley of C Biscuit Poker Staking have filed a lawsuit against him for 10% of his winnings plus damages. Marchington had sold 10% of his action to them for the Main Event and the $5,000 event #89, but he then cancelled on them via text message before the events started.

Marchington had indicated that he then found backers who were willing to stake him for the Main Event at a higher markup, 1.7 rather than the 1.2 Yee and Hartley had paid for. However, despite cancelling earlier Marchington sent them a picture of his receipt for the $5,000 event where he confirmed he had changed his mind and decided to keep their stake in that event after all, but could not confirm the same for the Main Event.

On July 3, the day before he played the Main Event, he confirmed he had cancelled their action in it, at which point the two parties discussed the returning of the $1,200 stake for that event. According to Yee and Hartley he tried to return the stake on July 5, the day after he played Day 1B of the Main.

Caesars have withheld $152,000 of Marchington's winnings until this dispute is settled. The crux of the argument in court (and on poker Twitter) is whether a player has the right to cancel a stake prior to an event starting, as well as whether that requires the money to be returned before the event starts. There is also a debate taking place around whether because Yee and Hartley had seemingly accepted the cancellation and begun proceedings to get the money back, whether that voids any complaint they have against him. The first time Marchington was made aware of any legal action against him was when he went to collect his winnings. However, Yee and Hartley had previously expressed their grievance with Marchington to him during the proceedings and posted a negative review of him on a 2+2 staking thread.

FlushDraw.net have a very comprehensive break down of this case if you want to dig deep into the dispute.

The big question now is how a Nevada court will see this incredibly tricky and nuanced situation the poker community cannot agree on?

Whose side are you on in this dispute? Let us know in the comments: