Attorney General Opinion No.
Background
- KRGC asks whether KELA prohibits casino employees, contractors, or any casino-affiliated person from loaning money or extending credit to patrons.
- KELA 74-8756(c) prohibits loaning or extending credit by persons with any legal affiliation to a lottery gaming facility manager.
- Statutory definitions: 'lottery gaming facility manager' includes casino operators; penalties escalate on subsequent convictions.
- KRGC also asks if VIP Preferred check-cashing (GPGS) constitutes a loan or credit under KELA.
- Check-cashing program details: VIP Preferred uses guaranteed checks paid by GPGS, with fees to casino; no deferral of payment on e-checks.
- KRGC regulations permit check-cashing if compliance requirements are met; GPGS e-checks act like signature debit cards, not loans.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does KELA prohibit only casino-affiliated personnel from lending or extending credit? | KRGC contends statute targets all casino-affiliated loan activity; broad prohibition is intended. | The statute prohibits only employees/contractors/affiliates from loaning; literal text controls. | Statute read to prohibit casino and its affiliates from lending or extending credit. |
| Are VIP Preferred e-checks a loan or credit under KELA? | KRGC concerns (e-checks) could create credit or loan under KELA. | VIP Preferred e-checks are signature debits, not loans or credit; not within KELA. | VIP Preferred e-checks are not loans or credit; program compliant if KOGC regs followed. |
Key Cases Cited
- National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. MidlandBancor, Inc., 854 F. Supp. 782 (D. Kan. 1994) (used to interpret plain language and legislative intent)
- Todd v. Kelly, 251 Kan. 512 (Kan. 1992) (statutory construction principle avoiding absurd results)
- Peck v. University Residence Comm. of Kan. State Univ., 248 Kan. 450 (Kan. 1991) (precedent cited for general permissible reliance on authorities)