(§5-423 General Obligations Law; §225.10 Penal Law)  12. Plaintiffs bring this action as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a), and (b)(3) on behalf of a Class consisting of all those who entered the Lottery in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015, inclusive, for a chance of qualifying for the New York City Marathon and who were damaged thereby (the "Class").  13. The members of the Class are so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. While the exact number of Class members is unknown to Plaintiffs at this time and can only be ascertained through appropriate discovery, Plaintiffs believe that there are tens of thousands of members in the proposed Class who are geographically dispersed throughout the United States. Members of the Class may be identified from records maintained by Road Runners and may be notified of the pendency of this action by mail, email or other electronic means.  14. Plaintiffs' claims are typical of the claims of the members of the Class. All members of the Class paid the fee to enter the Lottery for a chance to win a spot in the Marathon. All members of the Class were similarly affected by Defendant's wrongful conduct in violation of New York law that is complained of herein.  16. Common questions of law or fact exist as to all members of the Class and predominate over any questions solely affecting individual members of the Class. Among the numerous questions of law or fact common to the Class are: a. whether Road Runners conducted an illegal lotteryfrom 2010 to 2015; b. whether Road Runners ever has obtained an identification number to conduct a game of chance from the New York Gaming Commission; c. whether Road Runners ever has obtained a license from New York City to conduct a game of chance; d. whether each year's Lottery netted proceeds in excess of $30,000; e. whether the aggregate value of the prizes awarded under each Lottery exceeded $500,000; f. whether Road Runners complied with sections 186 et seq. of N.Y. General Municipal Law in conducting the lotteries; and g. whether failure to comply with sections 186 et seq. of General Municipal Law gives rise to a private right of action under section 5-423 of General Obligations Law.  17. Road Runners has acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a whole.  19. Road Runners is the organizer and operator of the New York City Marathon, a prestigious, 26.2-mile road race through the five boroughs of New York City.  20. Though there are ways to qualify for the marathon other than participating in the Lottery - such as donating time or money to certain charities or running a qualifying time in another race. Once a person qualifies to run, he or she must pay a race-entry fee to run in the Marathon. The race entry fee, which in 2015 ranged from $216-347 depending on club membership and US residency, is not the subject of this action.  21. On information and belief, for each year from 2010 through 2015, approximately 80,000 prospective runners participated in the Lottery.  22. Road Runners allowed a limited number of these Lottery participants to qualify for the Marathon through the Lottery.  23. To enter the Lottery, prospective runners were required to pay Road Runners a fee of $11.The payment was nonrefundable.  24. On its website and in other promotional materials, Road Runners characterized the fee as a "processing fee."  25. The Lottery prize was qualification into the Marathon. Like all other qualifiers, however, those who qualified via the Lottery had to pay an additional race-entry fee to run in the race.  27. Plaintiff Konopa paid a fee to enter the Lottery for the 2014 New York City Marathon. He did not win the drawing. Road Runners retained the fee Konopa paid to enter the Lottery.  28. Plaintiff Clark paid to enter the Lottery for the 2011 New York City Marathon. He did not win the Lottery. Road Runners retained the fee that Mr. Clark paid to enter the Lottery.  29. Clark also paid to enter the Lottery for the 2015 Marathon. He did not win the Lottery, and Road Runners again retained the fee he paid.  30. All members of the Class paid a fee to enter the Lotteries for one or more of the New York City Marathons held in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, or 2015.  31. Road Runners retained the fees paid by Plaintiffs and the other member of the Class.  32. From 2010 to 20l5, the Lotteries generated millions of dollars in gross revenues for Road Runners.  33. For each and every year from 2010 to 2015, the net proceeds or net profits of the drawing exceeded $30,000as defined by section 186 of General Municipal Law.  34. For each and every year from 2010 through 2015, Road Runners did not have an identification number from the New York Gaming Commission, as generally is required under sections 189, 190 and 195-kof General Municipal Law.  36. For each and every year's Lottery from 2010 through2015, the aggregate value of the series of prizes awarded under the drawing exceeded $500,000.For purposes of this paragraph, the intended definition of the phrase "series of prizes" is the same as the definition described in section 186 of General Municipal Law.  37. In each and every year from 2010 to 2015, there was at least one day in which Road Runners collected more than $500in connection with the Lottery. 38. All prior paragraphs of this Complaint are re-alleged and incorporated as though fully set forth herein.  39. Road Runners' Lotteries for entry into the Marathons held from 2010 to 2015 involved consideration (the payment of a fee to enter the drawing), chance (the drawing itself), and a prize (qualification for the respective marathon).  40. Road Runners' Lotteries for entry into the 2010 to 2015 Marathons were unlawful because Road Runners did not have an identification number or license when conducting them and, for each Lottery, awarded a series of prizes that had an aggregate value in excess of $500,000.  41. By paying a fee to participate in Road Runners' chance-based Lottery, Plaintiffs Konopa and Clark purchased a share, interest, ticket, certificate of any share or interest, or part of a ticket, or any paper or instrument purporting to be a ticket or share or interest in any ticket, or purporting to be a certificate of any share or interest in any ticket, or in any portion of any lottery.  43. Plaintiffs and each member of the Class are entitled to double the amount of the fee(s) each paid to enter the drawing(s) plus double costs of suit.  44. An injunction is necessary to prevent Road Runners from again conducting a drawing in violation of New York gaming laws because, on information and belief, Road Runners intends to continue charging a fee to participate in the drawing in violation of those laws. 53. All prior paragraphs of this Complaint are re-alleged and incorporated as though fully set forth herein.  54. Road Runners knowingly advanced or profited from the drawings for entry into the 2010 to 2015 New York City Marathons.  56. For each year's drawing, the winning chances were to be determined by a drawing or by some other method based upon the element of chance.  57. For each year's drawing, the holders of the winning chances were to receive something of value (qualification for the marathon).  58. As part of the drawing(s) for entry into the 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 or 2015 Marathon, each member of the Class paid something of value (the application fee(s)) for a chance to qualify for the respective marathon(s), which chance was represented and differentiated by numbers or by combinations of numbers or by some other media, one or more of which chances were to be designated the winning ones.  59. Under drawings for entry into the 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 or 2015 Marathon, the winning chances were to be determined by a drawing or by some other method based upon the element of chance.  60. Under the drawings for entry into the 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 or2015 Marathon, the holders of the winning chances were to receive something of value (qualification for the Marathon).  61. Road Runners' drawings for entry into the 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 or 2015 Marathon were unlawful because Road Runners did not have an identification number or license when conducting them and, for each Lottery, awarded a series of prizes that had an aggregate value in excess of $500,000.  63. Plaintiffs Konopa and Clark and each member of the Class, therefore, may sue for and recover the fee(s) that each paid to enter the drawing(s).  64. An injunction is necessary to prevent Road Runners from again conducting a drawing in violation of New York gaming laws because, on information and belief, Road Runners intends to continue charging a fee to participate in the drawings in violation of those laws. FOR RELIEF (§5-423 General Obligations Law) 