Maryland Judge Rules Intralot Should Have Been Allowed to Fix Its $260m Lottery Bid

A Baltimore circuit judge has reversed the contract appeals board that upheld Intralot's disqualification from Maryland's lottery systems tender, reportedly holding that a 2025 procurement law required the state to let it correct its minority business paperwork. It revives Intralot's case, not its award: the state threw out every bid in December, and Scientific Games is still running the lottery while it fights that decision.

• Judge Paul J. Cucuzzella ruled on 9 October that a 2025 Maryland law required the state to let Intralot amend its minority business enterprise (MBE) schedule, reversing the Maryland State Board of Contract Appeals and remanding the case, according to The National Law Review
• The Board had held on 4 May that Intralot was rightly disqualified because two of its eight MBE firms were not certified for the work when it bid, and that the 2025 law did not apply retroactively
• Intralot's $260 million bid for the 10-year central systems contract was about $110 million below incumbent Scientific Games, and the State Lottery and Gaming Control Commission backed it 5 to 1 on 15 July 2025
• No one holds the new contract: all proposals were rejected on 19 December 2025 after contacts between commissioners and Intralot's lobbyists came to light, and Scientific Games is challenging that decision
• Scientific Games still runs the Maryland Lottery under its existing contract, reported to end on 4 May 2027, while the appeals stop the agency rebidding

A Circuit Judge Reopens the Question the Appeals Board Closed

Intralot asked the circuit court to review the Board of Contract Appeals' decision in a petition filed on 2 June, and on 9 October Judge Cucuzzella ruled in its favour, according to The National Law Review. He concluded that the Procurement Reform Act of 2025 required the procurement officer "to notify Intralot of the deficiency and direct Intralot to submit an amended minority business enterprise participation schedule", the outlet reported, and reversed the Board's decision and remanded the matter for further proceedings. Cucuzzella sits on the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, according to the Maryland Judiciary. iGaming Times could not obtain the order, which is not published online, so the court's reasoning beyond the quoted passage is not known.

The Board's opinion, by Chairwoman Sonia S. Cho, sets out the facts. The request for proposals, issued on 19 July 2024, set an MBE goal of 28% of contract value and counted only firms certified by the Maryland Department of Transportation. Intralot listed eight MBE firms; two had applications pending for the industry codes covering the work they would do. Intralot said it could meet 32% participation with or without them and included a contingency plan; the two were approved on 25 July 2025, after the award vote.

The Board found that Intralot knowingly listed uncertified firms without seeking a waiver, that this was not a curable minor irregularity, and that the 2025 Act, signed on 20 May 2025 and in force from 1 October 2025, did not apply retroactively to forms submitted on 24 November 2024. It then ruled that Intralot had no standing to pursue its other appeals.

From Preferred Bidder to Nobody

The Commission voted 5 to 1 on 15 July 2025 to approve the recommendation of Intralot, whose $260,393,946 price undercut Scientific Games at $371,120,165 and IGT Global Solutions at $641,026,355, according to LotteryUSA. The vote was preliminary; the Board of Public Works makes the award, Maryland Matters reported. Scientific Games protested on 21 July, and on 1 August the procurement officer, John P. Lloyd, rejected Intralot's proposal and recommended Scientific Games, which withdrew its protest, according to the Board. Intralot called the decision "a great surprise".

On 25 September 2025 the Commission voted 4 to 3 against the recommendation of Scientific Games. Records released on 10 October 2025 showed emails and texts between June and August 2025 between Intralot's lobbyists and Commission members about its MBE firms' applications, the Board's opinion records. On 19 December the procurement officer concluded those contacts had "adversely impacted the procurement" and rejected all proposals so that the tender could be run again. Scientific Games is appealing that at the Board, which in May said its reasonableness was a question of fact, and has separately sued in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court to stop a rebid.

In September the Board sanctioned the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Agency for repeatedly failing to produce documents, ruling that withheld records will be presumed favourable to Scientific Games, Maryland Matters reported. The outlet said the agency cannot rebid while the appeals continue, that the existing contract expires in May and that it will likely need extending; LotteryUSA put the end date at 4 May 2027. The lottery reported estimated fiscal 2026 sales of $2.68 billion and $681.6 million in contributions to the state, according to the agency.

The Ruling Revives Intralot's Bid, Not Its Award

The judgment restores a proposal to a tender the state has already cancelled. The December rejection of all proposals rested on a different ground, the lobbyist contacts, and it is Scientific Games that is contesting it. A cure opportunity helps Intralot only if the cancellation is undone; if it stands, every bidder starts again. The ruling does change the Board's footing: its finding that Intralot had no standing to pursue its other appeals rested on the rejection being lawful, and a judge has now, as reported, held otherwise. Whether the state takes that to the Appellate Court of Maryland is the next decision to watch; iGaming Times found no report of an appeal by 24 October.

The Retroactivity Point Reaches Beyond One Contract

The Board treated the 2025 Act as a rule for bids made after October 2025. A ruling that it required a cure for a proposal submitted in November 2024 would matter to every Maryland tender that was open when the law changed. Until the order is available, it is not clear whether the judge held the law retroactive or found that the duty arose because the procurement was still open when it took effect. That distinction will decide how far the ruling travels. For Intralot, now Bally's Intralot and 58% owned by Bally's Corporation since October 2025, the case lands while it is buying Evoke, the owner of William Hill and 888, and weeks after auditors questioned how Montana's lottery handled its Intralot deal.

The Price Gap That Started This Is Now Hostage to Litigation

Maryland backed Intralot because its price was about $110 million below the incumbent's, and 15 months later no contract has been awarded and Scientific Games keeps operating under the old one. Whether the state ever captures a saving of that size depends on litigation its own agency has been sanctioned for slowing down. The procurement has now produced a disqualification, a cancellation, sanctions and a reversal. The lesson for Intralot's lottery division, under new leadership since March, and for its rivals, is that compliance paperwork and lobbying conduct can now decide a tender as surely as price.

The Baltimore ruling gives Intralot back the argument it lost in May. It does not give it the contract, and the cancelled tender, not the cured paperwork, now decides who runs Maryland's lottery next.