Nevada Supreme Court hears Sands’ appeal of decision to keep judge on case

The wrongful termination dispute between Las Vegas Sands Corp. and former Sands Macau executive Steven Jacobs returned to the Nevada Supreme Court for a fresh round of arguments Tuesday.

As in past appeals, the issue was Sands’ ongoing effort to have Clark County District Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez removed from the case, which she has overseen since it was filed by Jacobs in 2010.

Famed attorney Alan Dershowitz, representing Sands, challenged Clark County Chief Judge David Barker’s recent denial of the company’s motion to assign the case to a different judge. Sands has long argued that Gonzalez has treated the company unfairly.

On Tuesday, Dershowitz argued that Barker didn’t give enough attention to Sands’ contention that Gonzalez acted improperly and displayed bias against the company during a brief interview with Time magazine in January.

A Time reporter had asked Gonzalez about revelations that a Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter was ordered by the newspaper’s then-owner, GateHouse Media, to monitor her activities while GateHouse was finalizing the RJ’s sale to the family of Sands Chairman and CEO Sheldon Adelson. Time quoted the judge as saying she wasn’t concerned about reporters in her courtroom. In a subsequent affidavit, she said she did not discuss the Sands case with Time.

Barker in January ruled that Sands had presented no evidence that Gonzalez “has actual bias or implied bias either in favor of or against any party to this action.”

Dershowitz said Barker erred in simply accepting Gonzalez’ affidavit without a hearing on the issue.

Gonzalez must have known her comments to Time would fuel a disqualification effort, Dershowitz said.

“She should have known she was inviting trouble,” he said.

But attorney Todd Bice, representing Jacobs, called the appeal the latest delaying tactic by Adelson. Bice said Adelson does not want a public trial that would air his client’s business practices in Macau.

“This case is going to be 6 years old in very short order,” Bice said. “There has been no trial.”

But Justice James Hardesty asked whether Barker should at least hold a hearing to determine whether the Time interview created the appearance of impropriety. It is important for a transparent judiciary that this be thoroughly vetted and tested, he said.

Bice said Barker acted correctly: Gonzalez made it clear she did not discuss the case with the reporter, so no hearing was required. In court filings, he maintained that Sands itself brought media attention on the judge in its effort to disqualify her.

The Nevada Supreme Court has rejected three other attempts to replace Gonzalez, he noted.

Three of the seven justices have recused themselves from the case: Kristina Pickering, because her spouse is an Adelson attorney; Michael Cherry, because he is an uncompensated director for the Dr. Miriam & Sheldon G. Adelson Clinic for Drug Abuse Treatment & Research Inc.; and Ron Parraguirre, because of a law firm conflict.

Contact Sean Whaley at swhaley@reviewjournal.com or 775-461-3820. Find him on Twitter: @seanw801.