Fiduciary duty claims survive while standalone specific performance claim dismissed

Summary: New York Attorney General Letitia James files suit against Kalshi Kalshi accused of operating without New York State Gaming Commission license CFTC challenges New York enforcement as regulatory overreach     New York's attorney general sued Kalshi on July 31, claiming that its prediction market platform violates state laws against illegal gambling. In a petition filed in a state court in Manhattan, Attorney General Letitia James said Kalshi failed to obtain a New York State Gaming Commission license to operate its platform, where people trade based on the predicted outcomes of sports, elections and other events. The attorney general said such platforms can encourage problem gambling, including by people under age 21, and endanger people's financial, emotional and physical health. She filed similar petitions in April against two other prediction market operators, Coinbase Financial Markets and Gemini Titan, saying all three companies' so-called event contracts were "quintessentially" gambling. Prediction markets such as Kalshi and Polymarket have soared in popularity since the 2024 U.S. presidential election, when they fared better than pollsters in predicting Republican Donald Trump's victory over Democrat Kamala Harris. Their growth has sparked a flurry of lawsuits and countersuits over the authority of individual U.S. states, rather than the federal government, to regulate the industry. The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission has claimed exclusive oversight and challenged regulatory activity in at least nine states including New York, which it sued in April. Less than one hour before New York sued Kalshi, the CFTC filed an "emergency" motion in Manhattan federal court to stop the state's enforcement activity, calling it "overreach" that would irreparably harm the agency and markets it regulates. The CFTC filing followed July 29’s rejection by the federal appeals court in Manhattan of Kalshi's request to avoid being subjected to New York's gambling laws, while it appeals U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres' refusal on July 8 to issue an injunction against the state. Kalshi had preemptively sued New York last October to block enforcement. According to New York's petition, Kalshi's prediction markets are gambling because people can wager on events whose outcomes they don't control, such as who will win the Super Bowl or the reality TV show "Big Brother." New York also objected to Kalshi letting 18- to 20-year-olds use its platform, despite a minimum age of 21 under state law for mobile sports betting. At least four states — Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada and Washington — have won court orders restricting Kalshi's activities. In refusing to stop potential New York enforcement activity, Torres found the state's interests in preventing gambling addiction, preserving the integrity of sports, and avoiding a proliferation of unregulated contracts "heavily" outweighed Kalshi's interests in ensuring the primacy of federal law and avoiding "intractable" technology issues for customers. New York's lawsuit seeks a halt to Kalshi's alleged unlawful conduct, the forfeiture of illegal gains, civil fines equal to triple those gains, and restitution to customers.

Summary: Judge James Robart dismisses Zillow racketeering lawsuit Claims of steering homebuyers to Zillow agents found implausible Plaintiffs allowed to amend complaint by August 17   In the midst of several legal battles over its practices, Zillow has secured a key court victory. Seattle-based U.S. District Judge James Robart on July 27 dismissed a lawsuit against Zillow that said the company violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act by allegedly steering homebuyers toward Zillow-affiliated agents and Zillow Home Loans. Zillow and fellow defendant GK Properties filed motions to dismiss in February, arguing that the plaintiffs' lengthy complaint was "heavy on filler but thin on substance." "Plaintiffs' claims of lack of notice are implausible given Zillow's express, repeated disclosures," the dismissal ruling reads. "Plaintiffs fail to plead specific facts showing how Defendants' practices actively undermined the homebuying process, restricted informed lender choice, or eroded trust in real estate professionals." In the suit, originally filed in September 2025, the plaintiff alleged that Zillow tricks consumers into using agents affiliated with the portal through its Flex and Premier Agent programs, resulting in inflated home purchase prices. An amended complaint filed in November 2025 said Zillow uses internal incentives to steer homebuyers to use its own mortgage business, Zillow Home Loans. The lawsuit was consolidated in December 2025 with a second complaint, by another plaintiff, first filed in November 2025 with similar claims. Robart said in his ruling that the complaint did not have enough factual allegations to substantiate the claims the plaintiffs made. The ruling said Zillow's website clearly displays the property's actual listing agent, and therefore it is implausible that buyers are tricked into working with a Zillow-affiliated agent. The complaint said that even though buyers are promised that the services of a Zillow-affiliated agent are free, the buyer's agent still receives a commission if the sale goes through. The ruling said those claims lack standing, because the fees in question came out of the seller's agent's total compensation, which was split with the buyer's agent, rather than from the buyer. The ruling also said the complaint failed to identify necessary information that highlighted exactly how Zillow allegedly steered homebuyers to its mortgage services. After the ruling, Zillow praised the judge for dismissing the "baseless complaint." The court is allowing the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint by Aug. 17, saying it "cannot conclude that Plaintiffs are entirely incapable of curing these defects" from their earlier filings.

Summary: EBay agrees to pay $46.15 million to the Steiners Settlement includes $6 million in charitable contributions Seven former eBay employees pleaded guilty to stalking charges EBay and three former top executives have agreed to pay $55.7 million to resolve a lawsuit by a Massachusetts couple who fell victim to a bizarre stalking and harassment campaign carried out by several of its employees in retaliation for their coverage of the e-commerce company in a newsletter they publish. David and Ina Steiner announced the settlement late on July 27, bringing an end to a case they filed in 2021 in Boston federal court after several former eBay employees were prosecuted for targeting them in a cyber-stalking campaign that involved sending the couple cockroaches, fly larvae and a bloody Halloween pig mask. As part of the settlement, eBay agreed to pay $46.15 million to the couple; fund $6 million in charitable contributions to nonprofit organizations; and issue a "strongly-worded" statement about the conduct of three of its top former executives. "We believe this resolution sends a clear message that corporations and their executives cannot engage in this type of misconduct without facing significant consequences," Christopher Murphy, the Steiners' attorney, said in a statement. EBay said in a statement that what happened to the Steiners was "wrong, reprehensible and should never have happened." "We continue to extend our deepest apologies to the Steiners," the company said. "This agreement is consistent with our commitment to fairly compensate the Steiners and fulfills our efforts to make things right." Seven former eBay workers pleaded guilty and received sentences of as high as 57 months in prison for participating in the scheme, which also involved several of them traveling from California to Natick, Massachusetts, to surveil the Steiners and try to install a GPS tracking device on their car. Prosecutors have said that the aim was to silence them after senior executives deemed their newsletter, EcommerceBytes, critical of the company. The campaign began after then-CEO Devin Wenig in August 2019 texted Steve Wymer, then its chief communications officer, that it was time to "take her down," referring to Ina Steiner, according to prosecutors and the Steiners. EBay itself was criminally charged and agreed in 2024 to pay a $3 million fine. Wenig, a former Thomson Reuters executive who stepped down as eBay's CEO in September 2019, was never charged. His lawyers have argued he had no knowledge or involvement in the harassment campaign and that his messages had been advocating for a public relations strategy to address Ina Steiner's reporting. As part of the settlement, the Steiners' attorneys said Wenig will pay them $2 million and make a $1 million donation to a charity focused on protecting First Amendment rights in the name of Ina Steiner. "No one should ever have been subjected to what the Steiners endured in 2019, and I’m saddened by it, especially because it occurred during my time as CEO of eBay," Wenig said in a statement on July 28. "This behavior is antithetical to everything I stand for and believe in." Wendy Jones, who previously served as senior vice president of global operations, and Wymer will pay the couple $500,000 and $50,000, respectively, the plaintiffs say. Their lawyers did not respond to requests for comment. The Steiners' lawyers said additional settlements were reached with all other eBay employees named in their lawsuit. (Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Nick Zieminski)