Winning this lawsuit was not in the cards for a Lackawanna County couple.
In a ruling issued Monday, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania upheld a Lackawanna County Court ruling that a 232-year-old Pennsylvania law does not allow the couple — neurologist Vithalbahai Dhaduk and his wife, Ranjan Dhaduk — to recover $700,000 in loans given to a friend — internist Bhupendra Patel, M.D. — to cover Patel’s losses from gambling in the card game blackjack at a Florida casino.
The Dhaduks, of Glenburn Twp., sued Patel, of Susquehanna borough, in July 2024 in Lackawanna County Court, claiming breach of contract, fraud, unjust enrichment and promissory estoppel — meaning reneging on a promise to pay back the loan — according to that lawsuit.
But in a ruling issued March 31, 2025, Lackawanna County Judge Terrence Nealon dismissed the lawsuit because applicable state law enacted in 1794 holds that a person who loses money gambling cannot be compelled to pay the debt and any agreement or promise to pay is “utterly void.”
Derived from the Statute of Queen Anne enacted in 1710 in Great Britain, the 1794 law titled “Gaming Contracts To Be Void” was enacted during a time when all gambling was illegal throughout Pennsylvania.
The 232-year-old law’s pertinent part, Section 2031, states in part: “If any person or persons shall lose any money or other valuable thing, at or upon any match of cock-fighting, bullet-playing, or horse-racing, or at or upon any game of address, game of hazard, play or game whatsoever, the person or persons who shall lose their money or other valuable thing shall not be compelled to pay or make good the same.”
The Dhaduks contended the 1794 law applied only to “illegal gambling.” In 2004, Pennsylvania enacted the Pennsylvania Race Horse Development and Gaming Act that legalized some gambling, including slot machines and table games such as roulette, baccarat, blackjack, poker and craps, among others, and that were distinct from lottery games established over 30 years earlier.
According to the breach-of-contract lawsuit and county and Superior Court rulings: the two physicians have been friends for over 50 years, since high school in India; they frequently gambled together, with Dhaduk often playing blackjack on Patel’s behalf and Patel agreeing to be responsible for any losses; and the Dhaduks claimed Patel did not pay $700,000 owed to the couple for two loans they gave Patel while gambling in 2019 at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel & Casino in Hollywood, Florida, and which included $200,000 in chips that Dr. Dhaduk bought for Patel and $500,000 obtained from Dr. Dhaduk’s line of credit.
But Nealon’s ruling concluded that under the plain meaning of Section 2031, the Dhaduks could not recover the money loaned to Patel; and the 2004 gaming law did not repeal Section 2031.
In appealing Nealon’s decision to the state Superior Court, the Dhaduks claimed “there is nothing ‘illegal’ about two highly educated, sophisticated doctors, lifelong friends, lawfully frequenting casinos, where they each hold substantial lines of credit personally, playing in high stakes private rooms, and exchanging ‘loans’ and chips under their repayment agreement.”
The Dhaduks also claimed that “to loan money does not involve a gamble or wager on the part of the lender” and thus their recovery of the $700,000 should not be barred under law, and “legalized casino gambling has evolved astronomically” since Section 2031 was enacted in 1794.
On Monday, the Superior Court upheld Nealon’s ruling.
“The Dhaduks loaned Patel money and knew when they did so that it was for gambling purposes. Section 2031 precludes recovery of the debt,” the Superior Court ruling said.
It also deemed as moot other legal arguments raised by the Dhaduks on appeal because those points had not been first raised in the lawsuit.