In March 2026, two Pennsylvania men filed a product liability suit in Philadelphia that has come to be known as the Sage and Thompson v. DraftKings lawsuit, targeting DraftKings, FanDuel, the NFL, Genius Sports, and five individual sportsbook employees. The complaint alleges the betting apps were engineered as “unreasonably dangerous” addiction machines and that VIP hosts kept pushing the two plaintiffs to gamble even as they lost more than $2 million combined. The case was brought by the Public Health Advocacy Institute, the same legal shop that helped build the tobacco-industry litigation playbook in the 1990s.
Who the Plaintiffs Are
Christopher Sage and Terry Thompson are Pennsylvania residents who say they gambled for close to two decades without serious problems before signing up for the two apps. Their complaint was filed March 24, 2026, in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County.
Thompson accounts for the bulk of the losses. According to the complaint, he lost roughly $1.83 million across FanDuel and DraftKings after starting on FanDuel around October 2020 and joining DraftKings in 2022. He borrowed $40,000 from family and $25,000 from loan sharks. His truck was repossessed. He nearly lost his home to foreclosure.
Sage started betting at physical sportsbooks as a high school senior in 2003 in what the complaint calls a sustainable recreational activity that lasted fifteen years. After Pennsylvania legalized online sports betting in 2018, he joined both apps. He placed over $1.6 million in wagers on FanDuel and about $360,000 on DraftKings, losing $133,000 and $42,000 respectively. He developed a compulsive habit around microbets and was formally diagnosed with gambling addiction disorder in March 2025.
What the Complaint Claims
The suit brings claims for design defect, negligence, failure to warn, intentional infliction of emotional distress, unjust enrichment, and violations of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. The central theory is product liability: that the apps themselves are defectively designed.
The design defect argument focuses on microbetting, the rapid in-game wagering that lets users bet on individual plays, pitches, or points as an event unfolds. The complaint alleges the apps use artificial intelligence, machine learning, and behavioral data to personalize and accelerate microbetting, creating what it describes as a “relentless, always-on addiction-amplifying machine” with no natural pauses or offramps. The plaintiffs’ lawyers compare the experience to a slot machine.
Why the NFL and Genius Sports Are Defendants
The NFL and Genius Sports are named because of their role in supplying the data that makes microbetting possible. Genius Sports is the league’s exclusive distributor of real-time play-by-play statistics and official betting data under a partnership dating to 2021 that runs through at least the 2029 season. The NFL holds stock warrants that, once fully vested, would give it an approximately 8.7% stake in Genius Sports, making the league the company’s largest shareholder. The complaint argues that arrangement turns the NFL into a direct financial beneficiary of the betting activity it helps fuel. The league generated an estimated $30 billion in betting volume during the most recent season.
The VIP Host Allegations
Some of the most concrete misconduct allegations involve the VIP host programs at DraftKings and FanDuel. Both companies assign personal hosts to high-volume bettors. The lawsuit names five of them as individual defendants: Bryttani Morgan, Michael Sonbeek, Dyleisha Lewis, Peter Donahue, and Shaun Gordon.
Thompson, according to the complaint, received lavish perks through his VIP status. FanDuel provided tickets and hotel accommodations for Super Bowl LVI in California and Super Bowl LVII in Arizona, along with gifts including a $500 bottle of champagne. On December 18, 2022, his FanDuel host Bryttani Morgan messaged him suggesting he take a “timeout” to enjoy the holidays with his family. About a month later, the same host contacted him about an “emergency” that turned out to be an invitation to the Super Bowl. The complaint alleges Morgan messaged Thompson hundreds of times to encourage gambling and portrayed herself as a friend to maintain his engagement.
Sage was assigned hosts by both platforms. Perks arranged for him included free accommodations for a bachelor party in Atlantic City and Phillies tickets. A DraftKings host reportedly sent him photos of herself at sporting events. After significant losses, hosts would send what the complaint calls “commiserating” texts designed to keep him betting. When Sage placed himself on Pennsylvania’s self-exclusion gambling list on March 15, 2025, the lawsuit alleges his DraftKings host Dyleisha Lewis continued contacting him afterward.
The Tobacco-Litigation Playbook Behind the Case
The lawsuit was filed by the Public Health Advocacy Institute, a nonprofit affiliated with Northeastern University School of Law and founded in 1979. PHAI’s president, Richard Daynard, is a law professor whose career is defined by his work against the tobacco industry. In the 1980s and 1990s, he led the Tobacco Products Liability Project and introduced the unjust enrichment theory to tobacco litigation, arguing that states were injured parties because they bore the medical costs of treating smokers. That work contributed to the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement, in which tobacco companies agreed to pay more than $200 billion.
Daynard has been explicit about applying the same framework to gambling. He argues that sports betting operators, like tobacco companies, have engineered their products to foster addiction and that industry “responsible gaming” messaging is a deflection. PHAI’s executive director, Mark Gottlieb, is co-counsel alongside Philadelphia attorney Alan Tauber, who has over thirty years of trial and appellate experience and previously served as chief defender of the Defender Association of Philadelphia.
How This Case Fits the Broader Wave
Sage and Thompson is one of more than 80 lawsuits filed against online sports betting operators across the country as of mid-2026. The city of Baltimore sued DraftKings and FanDuel in April 2025, alleging violations of consumer protection laws and targeting of vulnerable users. Individual cases have been filed in New Jersey, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Illinois, New York, and Pennsylvania, with legal observers expecting eventual consolidation.
A separate Pennsylvania case involves psychiatrist Dr. Kavita Fischer, who alleges DraftKings upgraded her to VIP status and continued sending incentives after she told her host she should “quit gambling completely,” to which the company responded with $500 in casino credits. Three additional Massachusetts lawsuits filed in early 2026 make similar allegations about data-driven algorithms and VIP programs.
Early rulings have not uniformly favored plaintiffs. The Third Circuit upheld the dismissal of a suit against BetMGM in April 2025, ruling that New Jersey law does not impose a duty on casinos to prevent compulsive gambling. A federal judge in Pennsylvania dismissed a class action against DraftKings in March 2026, writing that “encouraging persons to gamble, even if the persons are compulsive gamblers, does not meet the high bar of extreme and outrageous conduct.” Defendants have consistently argued that state-licensed gambling is a legal activity and that personal responsibility applies.
Where the Case Stands Now
The case is docketed as Sage and Thompson v. DraftKings, Inc. et al., No. 260303384. As of its March 2026 filing, none of the defendants had responded to the complaint, and the NFL declined to comment. The plaintiffs are seeking a jury trial, compensatory damages, attorney fees, and an injunction against the alleged conduct. Whether the case survives motions to dismiss will test whether product liability theories built to fight tobacco can gain traction against an industry that, unlike cigarettes, operates with explicit state authorization and oversight from bodies like the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board.