A Denver man owes a Colorado Springs man $27,500 from a bet the two placed on the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, Colorado’s second-highest court agreed on Thursday.

Richmond Lee Meyer and Jason Vanstrom were friends for several years through their mutual interest in gambling and the cannabis industry. Prior to election day 2020, they agreed to bet $27,500 on the results. Vanstrom, of Colorado Springs, believed President Joe Biden would win. Meyer, of Denver, bet on former President Donald Trump.

Upon Biden’s victory, Meyer declined to pay, insisting Trump actually won and the election was “rigged.” Vanstrom then sued for breach of contract.

Case: Vanstrom v. Meyer

Decided: July 13, 2023

Jurisdiction: Denver

Ruling: 3-0

Judges: Anthony J. Navarro (author)

Jaclyn Casey Brown

David H. Yun

Background: Far too little vote fraud to tip election to Trump, AP finds

Following a short trial in which Meyer represented himself, Denver District Court Judge David H. Goldberg agreed the debt was valid. He found both men were “sophisticated, financially sound and politically astute risk takers,” and a “social gambling debt” is enforceable in Colorado.

As for Meyer’s insistence that the 2020 election was fraudulent, “This Court takes judicial notice that President Biden was elected president,” Goldberg wrote.

Meyer turned to the Court of Appeals, accusing Goldberg of “bias,” “abuse of power,” and “excessive mistreatment” of him. Still representing himself, Meyer advanced several arguments, without evidence, attempting to call the election’s integrity into question.

In disputing the outcome, he pointed to “voter suppression” and “strict ID laws,” which Democrats have historically taken issue with, as well as “illegal immigrants” and “dead voters,” which are concerns Republicans generally raise.

“There is no evidence of an election taking place – the data has been deleted,” Meyer wrote without elaboration.

Finally, he referenced his unsuccessful attempt at trial to call as a witness Tina Peters, the Republican former clerk of Mesa County who is herself facing criminal charges for allegedly tampering with election equipment.

A three-judge panel for the Court of Appeals rejected Meyer’s arguments for overturning Goldberg’s ruling.

“(T)o the extent Meyer argues that the court should have given him more time to locate other evidence of alleged election fraud, we disagree,” wrote Judge Anthony J. Navarro in the July 13 opinion. “Even assuming that such evidence existed, Meyer had plenty of time to procure it.”

The panel also determined Meyer was not entitled to a jury trial, as he only requested a jury on the day the trial was scheduled to happen. Further, it declined to invalidate the bet on the basis that Vanstrom was allegedly a “professional gambler,” rather than a “social” one.

The case is Vanstrom v. Meyer.