An Iowa bettor, Nicholas Bavas, is asking a judge to rule on his lawsuit against DraftKings without a full trial. He says the company canceled five golf bets that would have paid about $14 million after the 2024 AT&T Pebble Pro-Am ended early.
The case is set for trial in September 2026, but Bavas wants a faster decision now. DraftKings says its house rules allowed it to void the wagers, and it has until October 10 to respond to the new request.
What the Lawsuit is About
Nicholas Bavas filed his lawsuit in May, saying DraftKings wrongly canceled five wagers he placed on the AT&T Pebble Pro-Am. The tournament was cut short at 54 holes due to weather, and the final leaderboard, Bavas says, matched the picks on his tickets. He argues that the bets should stand and the book should pay out.
DraftKings Iowa says it acted within its rules. The company points to its posted house rules, which tell customers that errors can occur and that the sportsbook may cancel wagers if a mistake affected the odds or outcomes on the site. Those rules are standard across many online books and are agreed to when players open accounts and place bets.
Bavas disagrees. He claims his tickets were valid when placed, the market was live, and the results lined up with the bets. He says canceling after the event ended cheated him out of a huge win.
The five wagers together, according to the complaint, would have paid about $14.2 million. For a single Iowa bettor, that would be one of the largest contested payouts tied to golf markets in recent memory.
Why a Judge’s Decision Now Matters
This month, Bavas asked the court for summary judgment. That means he wants the judge to rule on the case based on the filings, without a jury trial. Summary judgment can be granted if there are no major facts in dispute and the law clearly favors one side.
If the judge agrees, the case could end much sooner than September 2026. If the judge denies the motion, the lawsuit would proceed toward trial as scheduled.
DraftKings has until October 10 to respond to the request. In earlier filings, the company framed the dispute as a standard application of house rules, not a one-off decision. That argument could matter.
Courts often look at whether terms were clear, whether the player agreed to them, and whether the operator applied them consistently. If the judge finds the rules were clear and properly used, DraftKings could win. If the judge finds the cancellation was improper under Iowa law or the contract, Bavas could move closer to collecting.
For Iowa sports betting fans, the outcome may shape how books handle voided bets after unusual events, like shortened tournaments or obvious pricing mistakes. A ruling for DraftKings could reinforce that house rules control in gray areas, even when a ticket looks like a winner.
A ruling for Bavas could push operators to clarify markets, delay grading, or avoid cancellations except in narrow cases.
Either way, the case is a reminder to read the terms and conditions before betting. Golf events can change fast due to weather or format quirks, and that can affect how books settle markets.
If you place futures or long-odds props, take a moment to check how the book treats shortened events, palpable errors, or corrections after results are posted. Those details matter when the stakes are high.
What’s next: the judge will review the filings, and DraftKings will submit its response by the deadline. From there, the court can either issue a decision on the motion or set the stage for more discovery and, if needed, a 2026 trial. We’ll watch for updates that affect bettors and how Iowa sportsbooks handle similar disputes.
