The Supreme Court turned back an appeal Monday from casino mogul Steve Wynn, who had challenged a landmark libel ruling as part of a lawsuit against The Associated Press.
The court declined to hear the case in a brief order without comment, as is typical. Wynn had sued over a story about reports to police of sexual misconduct allegations dating back to the 1970s.
His attorneys had asked the high court to reconsider the 1964 ruling known as New York Times v. Sullivan. It found that public figures in defamation suits must show that a statement is not only false, but was published knowing or with reckless disregard to it being untrue, a standard referred to as “actual malice.”
Wynn, a billionaire developer of a luxury casino empire, has consistently denied sexual misconduct allegations first reported in January 2018 by The Wall Street Journal.
He resigned as CEO of Wynn Resorts after the reports became public, agreeing with Nevada gambling regulators to pay a $10 million fine with no admission of wrongdoing.
Wynn filed his defamation lawsuit in April 2018 against the AP and one of its reporters over a story that cited police documents. His attorneys argued the story failed to fully describe elements of one allegation that would have cast doubt on the account. A judge in a civil case against the accuser later found the claim to be without merit.
The Nevada Supreme Court upheld a ruling tossing out Wynn’s lawsuit against the AP, finding the news organization had published “an article in a good-faith effort to inform their readers regarding an issue of clear public interest.”
Nevada Supreme Court Justice Ron Parraguirre cited the actual malice standard and found that Wynn, a public figure, hadn’t shown convincing evidence that cleared it.