Evolution Defamation Case Escalates

A legal showdown is unfolding between Evolution and a law firm representing anonymous clients in a high-stakes defamation case.

The firm has once again appealed a court order requiring it to reveal the identity of the client behind a controversial 2021 report.

The case raises critical questions about attorney-client privilege, whistleblower protections, and the legal boundaries of corporate investigations.

With billions at stake, the outcome could have far-reaching implications for the gaming industry and corporate legal strategy.

Evolution Defamation Case Intensifies as Law Firm Fights Client Disclosure Order

Key Developments in the Case

• Law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky LLP (CK) has filed an appeal against a court order to disclose its anonymous client.
• The dispute stems from a 2021 report alleging Evolution operated in prohibited markets, which regulators later found unsubstantiated.
• Evolution’s defamation lawsuit claims the report was false and caused significant reputational and financial damage.

Background: The 2021 Report That Sparked Controversy

The case originated in November 2021, when an anonymous client commissioned CK Law Firm to submit a report to the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (DGE).

The report alleged that Evolution was operating in blacklisted jurisdictions, violating regulatory requirements.

Following an investigation, the DGE found “no evidence” supporting these claims, effectively clearing Evolution.

However, by the time the findings were published, Evolution had already suffered significant reputational damage, with billions wiped from its market value.

Evolution responded by filing a defamation and trade libel lawsuit, arguing the report contained false information intended to harm its business.

Legal Battle Over Client Confidentiality

In February 2024, Superior Court Judge John C. Porto ruled in favor of Evolution, determining that the report was false and ordered CK to disclose its client’s identity.

The firm quickly appealed, citing concerns over attorney-client privilege and whistleblower protections.

In its appeal, CK argued:

• Revealing the client’s identity violates attorney-client confidentiality under Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6.
• The DGE report only stated it could not confirm the allegations, not that they were false.
• Forcing disclosure could discourage future whistleblowers from reporting potential corporate misconduct.

The firm further emphasized:

“Once confidential information is released, it cannot be undone. As the saying goes, the bell cannot be unrung.”

Evolution Pushes Back Against the Appeal

Evolution has dismissed CK’s arguments as deliberate attempts to stall the case and protect a bad-faith actor.

The gaming giant insists the report was:

• Intentionally misleading
• Created to damage its business
• Part of a coordinated attack

Evolution argues that if the client remains anonymous, it cannot pursue justice against those responsible for the alleged defamation.

What’s Next in the Legal Battle?

March 28, 2024 – The New Jersey Appellate Division will review CK’s appeal and decide whether the disclosure order stands.

If the appeal is denied, CK must reveal its client’s identity, potentially exposing corporate or competitor involvement.

If the appeal is granted, the case could drag on for months or even years, delaying Evolution’s ability to seek damages.

A Case with Major Industry Ramifications

The ongoing Evolution vs. CK legal battle is more than just a defamation lawsuit—it is a landmark case testing the limits of:

• Attorney-client privilege in corporate investigations
• Whistleblower protections in gaming regulation
• The legal consequences of unfounded market allegations

As the March 28 hearing approaches, all eyes will be on the New Jersey courts to see whether CK’s appeal holds or collapses—potentially exposing one of the gaming industry’s biggest corporate disputes in recent history.