The Pulsz lawsuit landscape centers on two Kentucky class action settlements totaling nearly $5 million, a federal ruling in Delaware that sent a player’s claims to arbitration on his own terms rather than the company’s, and a wave of state bans that has pushed Pulsz out of 14 states and into restricted mode in four more. Pulsz is run by Yellow Social Interactive Limited, a Gibraltar company that launched the platform in 2020 and has been fighting on multiple fronts ever since.
The Two Kentucky Class Action Settlements
Kentucky has produced the biggest payouts against Pulsz so far. Both cases alleged the same thing: that Pulsz operates as an illegal online casino under state law.
The $1.32 Million Settlement
In Whiting v. Yellow Social Interactive Ltd., Case No. 2023-CI-00358, filed in the Kentucky Circuit Court for Henderson County, Yellow Social Interactive agreed to a $1.32 million fund. The class covered Kentucky residents who spent $5 or more within a 24-hour period on pulsz.com between October 2, 2020, and November 3, 2022, or on pulszbingo.com between July 20, 2022, and February 9, 2023.1Top Class Actions. Pulsz Gambling Websites $1.32M Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Final approval came on December 11, 2023.
Payouts ran on a tiered scale: 10 percent of the first $1,000 spent, 17.5 percent of spending from $1,001 to $10,000, 30 percent of spending from $10,001 to $100,000, and 60 percent of spending above $100,000. After fees and administration costs, actual checks worked out to roughly three-quarters of that base amount.2Bonus.com. Pulsz Kentucky Class Action Settlement Filing Claim The claim deadline was January 29, 2024, so that fund is closed.
The $3.6 Million Settlement
A second Kentucky class action followed. In April 2024, Yellow Social Interactive agreed to pay $3.6 million to resolve those claims, again on the theory that Pulsz operated as an illegal online casino.3Herzog Law. Breaking Down the Latest Sweepstake and Social Casino Lawsuits and Enforcement Between the two deals, the company has paid out close to $5 million to Kentucky players.
Why Kentucky
Kentucky is a hard place for a sweepstakes operator to be sued because of a statute from 1798. Under KRS 372.020, someone who loses $5 or more gambling can sue the winner within five years to recover it. If the loser doesn’t sue within six months, KRS 372.040 lets any other Kentucky resident bring the case and collect treble damages.4FindLaw. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Brown v. Stars Interactive Holdings The Kentucky Supreme Court has held that operators who take a cut of wagers count as “winners” under the law, and that the treble-damages rule exists specifically to make illegal gambling operations unprofitable.5U.S. Supreme Court. PokerStars Petition Appendix That combination is what makes these class actions viable and why Pulsz chose to settle both.
The Arbitration Ruling Every Player Should Know About
Pulsz’s terms of use require individual arbitration and waive the right to bring class or representative actions. Under the current terms, users have 30 days after agreeing to opt out; after that, the waiver binds them.6Pulsz. Terms of Use Whether that waiver actually blocks group claims was tested in Yellow Social Interactive Limited v. Ebersole, Civil Action No. 23-352-CFC, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.
Christopher Ebersole, an Ohio resident, filed an arbitration demand with the American Arbitration Association in December 2022, seeking to recover his own losses and those of other Ohioans under Ohio’s anti-gambling statutes. Yellow Social Interactive sued in federal court and asked the judge to force Ebersole to arbitrate individually, arguing the class-action waiver ruled out his representative claims.7U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Yellow Social Interactive Ltd. v. Ebersole, No. 23-352-CFC
On October 11, 2023, Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly ruled against the company. The court found the terms of use showed “clear and unmistakable evidence” that the parties had delegated questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator. That meant the arbitrator, not a judge, would decide whether Ebersole’s statutory claims on behalf of other Ohioans survived the class-action waiver. Ebersole’s motion to compel arbitration was granted, the company’s motion for individual-only arbitration was denied, and the federal case was stayed.7U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Yellow Social Interactive Ltd. v. Ebersole, No. 23-352-CFC The practical takeaway: the waiver is still in the terms, and it still steers disputes into arbitration, but its reach over representative statutory claims is a live question the arbitrator gets to answer.
Where Pulsz Is No Longer Available
The lawsuits have run alongside a widening set of state bans, and Pulsz has pulled back accordingly. The platform is currently unavailable in 14 states: Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Idaho, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New York, Tennessee, Washington, and West Virginia. It runs in Gold Coins-only mode — meaning no Sweeps Coins and no cash redemptions — in Indiana, Maine, Mississippi, and New Jersey.8Pulsz. Where Can I Find Pulsz in the US If you had a balance in one of those states when access was cut, that is the terms-and-arbitration question above, not the class-settlement question.
The Broader State Crackdown
The state list has grown because legislatures and regulators across the country have been moving against the sweepstakes casino model. Connecticut and Montana bans took effect October 1, 2025. Nevada expanded its enforcement framework the same month. New Jersey outlawed the sweepstakes wagering model in August 2025. New York’s ban was finalized in December 2025, and California’s took effect January 1, 2026.9SILive.com. Online Sweepstakes Casinos Face Expanding Bans as States Seek to Shut Down the Model Legislation is active or pending in Indiana, Virginia, Iowa, Maryland, Mississippi, Maine, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Utah.
Regulators have piled on separately from legislatures. In March 2025, New York Attorney General Letitia James issued cease-and-desist letters to 26 online platforms, and the New York State Gaming Commission declared them to be illegal gambling.10New York Attorney General. Attorney General James Stops Illegal Online Sweepstakes Casinos Kentucky itself has sued VGW, another sweepstakes operator, on unlicensed-gambling theories similar to those used against Pulsz.11Bookmakers Review. Kentucky Files Lawsuit Against VGW Escalating Pressure on Sweepstakes Casinos Industry observers have noted that no sweepstakes operator has actually litigated a cease-and-desist order; operators have chosen to leave rather than fight.12Forbes. Sweepstakes Casino Giant VGW Ordered to Exit Maryland
The Shareholder Dispute in Gibraltar
One case involving Pulsz’s parent company is not a consumer matter. In April 2026, the Supreme Court of Gibraltar issued a first judgment in a shareholder dispute between Goldmist, which holds 89.8 percent of Yellow Social Interactive, and minority holder Damian Sokol, over allegations that Sokol diverted business to rival sweepstakes brands. The judge dismissed some claims, let a derivative claim and two conspiracy claims proceed, and suggested a “sale or buyout” may be the only workable resolution.13Next.io. Inside Battle Control One of Largest Sweeps It affects who owns Pulsz, not what a player can recover.