ShareThis Page
Casino sues former exec over clause in contract |

Casino sues former exec over clause in contract

Brian Bowling
| Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:00 a.m

A company that operates casinos in Pennsylvania and West Virginia claims in a federal lawsuit filed on Friday that former executive Edson “Ted” Arneault has violated his noncompete clause and illegally persuaded a former Erie consultant to breach his contract with the company.

MTR Gaming Group of Chester, W.Va., says Arneault violated a $1.6 million settlement agreement in September 2010 by becoming a shareholder and principal member of American Harness Tracks LLC, which is developing a racetrack and casino in Lawrence County.

MTR also claims Arneault violated the settlement by suing the company in April. Arneault’s federal lawsuit claims MTR, state gambling regulators and an Erie businessman conspired to publish false and malicious allegations against Arneault in an effort to hinder renewal of his gaming license and keep him out of the gambling industry.

Gregory Rubino is an Erie real estate agent who helped develop MTR’s Presque Isle Downs casino and racetrack in Erie. MTR claims Arneault revealed the terms of his settlement and other company secrets to get Rubino to breach his settlement with the company by joining Arneault in the lawsuit.

MTR also operates the Mountaineer casino and racetrack in Chester, W.Va.

Arneault, of New Smyrna Beach, Fla., and his lawyer, John Mizner, could not be reached for comment.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.