NJ Supreme Court Denies Appeal to Keep Accuser Confidential

One of the most controversial mysteries in the U.S. online gambling sector may soon be revealed. The New Jersey Supreme Court has denied an appeal to protect the identity of the anonymous client behind a damaging 2021 report targeting Evolution Gaming. With the denial, Evolution may finally unmask the individual or entity responsible for allegations that briefly wiped $10 billion off its market value. Industry observers should now prepare for potential courtroom revelations—or a confidential settlement that could bury the truth forever.

NJ Supreme Court Denies Appeal, Clearing Path for Revelation of Evolution’s Anonymous Accuser

3 Key Points:

1. The NJ Supreme Court denied Calcagni & Kanefsky’s appeal to shield their anonymous client’s identity.
2. The anonymous whistleblower accused Evolution of operating in prohibited jurisdictions in a 2021 report.
3. Evolution now expects full discovery responses, including the name of the accuser and their commissioner.

The New Jersey Supreme Court has officially denied an appeal to preserve the anonymity of the client who commissioned a bombshell 2021 report alleging Evolution Gaming operated in prohibited jurisdictions. This decision marks a turning point in a years-long legal saga that rattled investor confidence and sparked global debate about market access in regulated iGaming.

On 11 April 2025, the Court dismissed a motion filed by law firm Calcagni & Kanefsky (CK), which sought to block a lower court order compelling the firm to reveal the identity of the anonymous source behind the explosive allegations. The Court also vacated a previous stay it had granted in March, effectively forcing CK to comply with the discovery request.

A Report That Rocked the Industry

In 2021, CK submitted a confidential report to U.S. regulators on behalf of an unnamed client. The document claimed that Evolution’s live casino products were accessible in restricted markets, violating licensing terms and potentially facilitating unregulated gaming activity.

While Evolution denied the accusations, calling them “defamatory, false, and methodologically flawed,” the fallout was immediate. Investor panic saw nearly $10 billion wiped off the company’s market capitalization within days.

In response, Evolution filed a defamation suit in New Jersey Superior Court, initiating a complex legal battle over discovery rights and the protections afforded to anonymous whistleblowers.

Court Rules Against Veracity of the Claims

In February 2025, the presiding judge, John Porto, ruled that the original report lacked sufficient credibility. This judgment was significantly influenced by the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement (NJDGE), which had completed its own investigation and found no evidence that Evolution had facilitated or benefitted from illegal operations in prohibited jurisdictions.

As a result, the court ordered that CK disclose the identity of the anonymous author and the entity behind the report. CK resisted, pursuing a stay and later an appeal to the state’s highest court—both now denied.

What Happens Next?

The latest order puts CK on a tight deadline. In a letter sent to CK’s legal team on 16 April, Evolution’s attorneys demanded “full and complete” answers to pending interrogatories, including the name of the anonymous client and the party that funded the report.

Whether CK has complied remains unknown. If they do, the names could surface in future amended filings or trial proceedings. However, if the parties settle beforehand, the identity may remain confidential.

Sources suggest that the original commissioner may be a competing gaming supplier—a claim that aligns with earlier Bloomberg reporting and industry speculation. One insider, present during a closed-door investor meeting, confirmed that the entity was “a direct Evolution rival.”

The New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision ends a key chapter in a case that has captivated the global gaming industry. With the legal shield of anonymity now lifted, Evolution moves closer to exposing the forces behind one of the most impactful allegations in its history. Whether the truth will emerge in open court or be buried in a private settlement remains uncertain—but the implications for legal strategy, whistleblower protection, and corporate warfare in iGaming are far-reaching.