Despite a court not finding that he was innocent of the allegations of cheating at the table, Mike Postle just can’t seem to let the subject drop. The disgraced former star of the Stones Gambling Hall online streaming program Stones Live has sued for libel against a litany of defendants. In the court papers for the case, Stones alleges that the defendants have defamed him and “caused him emotional distress.”

Postle Goes After…Everyone

The list of people that Postle is going after with his lawsuit are pretty much everyone who has said he was cheating during the infamous Stones Live programs from 2019. The defendants in the case are:

Veronica Brill, who was a player/commentator on the Stones Live broadcasts who first posited that Postle could be utilizing methods of cheating on his way to winning almost $300,000 at the Stones $1/$3 tables,

ESPN and PokerNews.com (under their business name of iBus Media Limited) for their reporting on the case and resulting editorial commentary,

Mike Postle And Marle Cordeiro

Joey Ingram, Haralabos Voulgaris, Daniel Negreanu and Todd Witteles, for their personal commentary on the Stones Live broadcasts,

Upswing Poker, Seat Open LLC, Jonathan Little Holdings LLC, Solve for Why Academy LLC and Run it Once, Inc., owned by various poker professionals such as Jonathan Little and Phil Galfond who have analyzed the video from Stones Live and offered their opinions on the case.

In the lawsuit, Postle is seeking damages because he states his reputation has been damaged and that the case has caused him extreme emotional damage. The charges that he alleges are as follows:

A Mid-January Mike Postle / Postlegate Update: Those Service Blues The most interest-drawing topic in the poker world in recent months, the outing of alleged cheating by Mike Postle during dozens of “Stones Live” podcasts and a $10 million lawsuit subsequently filed by a lengthy list of alleged victims, is back in the news after two months. Mike Postle was on another tear. The moonfaced 42-year-old was deep into a marathon poker session at Stones Gambling Hall, a boxy glass-and-steel casino wedged between Interstate 80 and a Popeye's.

Defamation – Libel
Defamation – Slander
Trade Libel
False Light
Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage
Unfair Competition
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
He is seeking a jury trial in the case and is being represented by Lowe & Associates, P.C., in Beverly Hills, CA. No exact amount for damages is known at this time.

For his part, Witteles has stated that the suit is “frivolous” and that he will fight it. Although the other defendants in the case have yet to respond, it is expected they will vigorously fight Postle on the charges.

Case Never Litigated by California Courts

While Postle, floor manager Justin Kuriatis and Stones Gambling Hall saw the class action lawsuit against them dismissed, they WERE NOT judged to be “innocent” or “not guilty.” The courts in California simply dismissed the case against them because, under California law, you cannot utilize the legal system to recoup gaming losses. In that class action suit, more than 80 players tried to sue the trio, unsuccessfully as it turned out, and another case brought in Nevada was dismissed on jurisdictional issues.

In neither case were Postle, Kuriatis or Stones found innocent of the charges against them. But this hasn’t prevented any of them from saying that they are innocent. Stones Gambling Hall settled with over 60 of the plaintiffs in the class action suit while not admitting any guilt in the case. Kuriatis and Postle, instead of remaining silent on the case, have since loudly and incorrectly proclaimed on social media that they were found “not guilty.”

Mike Postle Wiki

Mike Postle Update

Whether a judge or jury will hear this case is the unknown. A judge may throw it out on several aspects (the players were offering their professional knowledge, the media companies were reporting on the news, etc.) and, even if it makes it to a jury trial, it will be highly difficult to get 12 people to unanimously agree against the list of defendants. Thus, Postle may be wasting his and other peoples’ time in a pursuit that the courts may find isn’t worth the paper it is written on.