The New Hampshire Lottery Commission is asking a judge to clarify his recent decision regarding the revocation of Andy Sanborn’s casino license, raising questions about the authority behind the ruling and its future implications.

In a Sept 22 order, Judge Gregory Albert denied a request from Sanborn’s attorneys to extend the deadline for selling his Concord Casino on South Main Street, stating he “lacks the authority to grant the relief.”

But he was sympathetic to Sanborn’s plight and didn’t shut the door completely. Albert gave both parties 15 business days to request a rehearing and if Sanborn’s attorneys pursued that option, the case could face an additional delay of 30 days, potentially escalating to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

The Lottery Commission wants to be clear that further delays will not affect Sanborn’s license, which it considers revoked as of Oct. 1.

Sanborn was forced to surrender his gaming license and sell his casino after a joint investigation by the New Hampshire Attorney General and the Lottery Commission last year revealed that he had fraudulently obtained and misused $844,000 in pandemic relief funds — money that was meant for small businesses, not casinos.

The investigation revealed that Sanborn had used the COVID-19 relief funds to finance a lavish lifestyle, including the purchase of a Ferrari for his wife, State Rep. Laurie Sanborn. A criminal investigation against Sanborn is also underway.

Albert’s decision last month followed a previous order by former Judge Michael King, who mandated that Sanborn sell the business by Sept. 30 or risk a two-year revocation of his gaming license.

Since King stepped down, Albert presided over the case. In a motion filed on Friday, attorneys for the Lottery Commission are seeking clarification on Albert’s preservation of  King’s order that was made nine months earlier.

The Lottery Commission said that it interprets Albert’s decision as meaning he has “not suspended the order in a manner that would create an extension.”

Albert said last month he believed that an extension was justified because if the deadline was enforced on Oct. 1, Concord Casino would become “virtually worthless,” as its most valuable asset is its existing license.

A new buyer could apply for a license, but they would face many challenges — finding a location, securing proper zoning, acquiring gaming machines, and hiring staff — all of which would already be in place if the casino is sold with its license intact.

These challenges would be greatly reduced if the Concord Casino is sold along with its license, location, and operational machines, Albert said.

The sale of Concord Casino has been difficult due to concerns from potential buyers about Sanborn’s legal troubles, which might lead to complications for the new owner.

The state is requesting that Albert clarify that staying King’s order “would not have the practical effect of extending the suspension period.”

Sruthi Gopalakrishnan can be reached at sgopalakrishnan@cmonitor.com