Who is elaine wynn dating budapest dating com

posted by | Leave a comment

Las Vegas casino magnate Steve Wynn reportedly pushed former female employees to have sex with him or perform sexual acts, and touched several female workers inappropriately in new allegations that span decades, according to a new report.

The revelations were detailed in the Wall Street Journal report Friday and span more than 10 years.

The Okada Parties argued that the privilege in NRS 463.120(6) did not apply because the requests for testimony and documents had been made over a year before the statute's effective date of June 12, 2017, and the statute was not retroactive. Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, available only when there is no “plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.” NRS 34.170; see also D. We therefore conclude that the district court erred in applying the statutory privilege and denying the motion to compel discovery on this basis. We note that nothing precludes the district court from considering other bases raised by Wynn Resorts for denying the motion to compel.

Specifically, they asserted that they had requested the production of documents in August 2014, they had attempted to depose Miller and obtain documents in February 2016, and they had served Wynn Resorts with interrogatories in April 2017 requesting information on the communications. “A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station, or to control a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.” Cote H. Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ relief and direct the clerk of this court to issue a writ of mandamus directing the district court to set aside the order denying the motion to compel testimony and documents relating to communications with the Nevada Gaming Control Board on the basis that the information was protected by NRS 463.120(6).

In February 2016, the Okada Parties deposed Wynn Resorts' director Robert Miller and sought details regarding the communications he had with the NGCB in late 2011 and early 2012, but Miller's counsel claimed that information was privileged and instructed Miller not to provide specifics about the communications. However, we have recognized on occasion that the availability of a direct appeal from a final judgment may not always be an adequate and speedy remedy. See, e.g., NRCP 37(a)(2)(B) (setting forth procedure for when a party fails to respond to a “request for inspection” or fails to “permit inspection as requested”); NRCP 37(a)(4) (setting forth sanctions where the “requested discovery is provided after the motion [to compel] was filed”). The Okada Parties alternatively seek a writ of prohibition; however, a writ of mandamus is more appropriate in this case because the district court did not exceed its jurisdiction in declining to order the production of discovery.

Miller's deposition was not completed, the Okada Parties sought and were granted additional time to complete it, and the deposition was scheduled to resume in October 2017. Thus, under the plain language of SB 376, the gaming privilege in NRS 463.120(6) does not apply to information that was requested through discovery before the statute became effective. See NRS 34.320 (providing that a writ of prohibition may issue when the district court acts “without or in excess of [its] jurisdiction”).4. 813, 828, 313 P.3d 849, 858-59 (2013) (explaining that legislative intent controls whether a statute may be applied retroactively).5.

Spinelli, Las Vegas, for Real Parties in Interest Wynn Resorts, Limited, and Robert J. OPINIONBy the Court, HARDESTY, J.: In this opinion, we consider whether the gaming privilege in NRS 463.120(6), which protects certain information and data provided to the gaming authorities, applies to information requested before the effective date of the statute. The parties acknowledge that the plain language of the act demonstrates that the privilege set forth in NRS 463.120(6) applies prospectively to any request made on or after June 12, 2017, the effective date of the act.

who is elaine wynn dating-90

Jefferies analyst David Katz said in a note Monday that he believes that should a Nevada court give Elaine Wynn control of her shares that there is a good chance she will seek to liquidate her stake in a thoughtful manner, over a period of time. Because the discovery requests in this case were made before the statute became effective, the gaming privilege in NRS 463.120(6) did not apply to the information sought by those discovery requests. The statute reads: Notwithstanding any other provision of state law, if any applicant or licensee provides or communicates any information and data to an agent or employee of the Board or Commission in connection with its regulatory, investigative or enforcement authority:(a) All such information and data are confidential and privileged and the confidentiality and privilege are not waived if the information and data are shared or have been shared with an authorized agent of any agency of the United States Government, any state or any political subdivision of a state or the government of any foreign country in connection with its regulatory, investigative or enforcement authority, regardless of whether such information and data are shared or have been shared either before or after being provided or communicated to an agent or employee of the Board or Commission; and(b) The applicant or licensee has a privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent any other person or governmental agent, employee or agency from disclosing, the privileged information and data.2017 Nev. The term “request” is not defined in SB 376 or elsewhere in NRS Chapter 463. This was erroneous, as the pertinent inquiry for determining whether the privilege applied to the information was the date of the initial discovery request seeking that information, not the date the requesting party sought an order from the court to compel the opposing party to comply with that discovery request. The gaming privilege codified in NRS 463.120(6) was enacted by the 2017 Legislature through Senate Bill (SB) 376. The effective date of SB 376 is June 12, 2017—the date of “passage and approval” of the act. Thus, argues Wynn Resorts, when the Okada Parties attempted to obtain the information in September 2017 by filing a motion to compel with the district court, the privilege applied to bar the district court from ordering disclosure of the information. Smith, Las Vegas; Greenberg Traurig, LLP, and Mark E. Cowden, Las Vegas; Sidley Austin, LLP, and James M. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORYThis writ petition arises from litigation between real party in interest Wynn Resorts, Limited, and petitioners Kazuo Okada, Aruze USA, Inc., and Universal Entertainment Corporation (collectively the “Okada Parties”), pertaining to the removal of Okada from Wynn Resorts' board of directors and the forced redemption of his ownership in the stock of Wynn Resorts in February 2012. “Request” is commonly defined as “[a]n act of asking for something.” The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 1492 (5th ed. Accordingly, we grant the petition for a writ of mandamus. This court “presume[s] that the Legislature intended to use words in their usual and natural meaning.” Mc Grath v. In determining the plain meaning of “request,” we may consult dictionary definitions.

Leave a Reply

Free adult dating profiles without registering