Judge cites ‘inconsistencies’ in Las Vegas Sands case

In a pointed remark from the bench on Tuesday, Clark County District Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez hinted that she is not buying the defense erected by Las Vegas Sands Corp. and Sands China Ltd. to fend off penalties for their conduct in a case brought by former top executive Steven Jacobs.

While sustaining an objection to a question brought by Jacobs attorney Todd Bice, Gonzalez added, "I agree with Mr. Bice that there are certain inconsistencies in the spin that is being provided to the court" that should be reserved for another potential sanctions action.

That particular flashpoint focused on whether Sands did not turn over certain documents Jacobs requested to make his case because Sands attorneys did not consider them relevant. Jacobs attorneys already have talked about pressing their own sanctions action due to what they consider a violation of a court order to provide the evidence.

But the broader issue of the current hearing, due to conclude today, is whether Sands hoodwinked the court for about a year. Sands' legal team contended it could not provide about 100,000 emails and other documents Jacobs wanted because they were in Macau and subject to its Personal Data Protection Act, even though a hard drive containing them was in Las Vegas.

Sands said it did nothing wrong.

"The defense we are putting forward ... was that there was no legal duty to disclose this until your honor made your honor's ruling on May 24, 2012," said Sands China attorney Brad Brian, who also spoke for Las Vegas Sands.

On that day, Gonzalez called off a hearing to determine whether Clark County court could exercise jurisdiction over Sands China, where Jacobs served as CEO until he was fired in July 2010 after a tenure that lasted just over a year. A month later, Las Vegas Sands reported that the hard drive was stored locally and issued a catalog of more documents in early July.

But Gonzalez recalled that at prior hearings on the subject of electronic evidence, Sands pleaded that its hands were tied by the Macau law.

For much of Tuesday, Las Vegas Sands attorney J. Stephen Peek sat as a witness over his role in handling the evidence. He testified that he first learned in late 2010 or early 2011 that documents had been moved to Las Vegas, some of which he reviewed and printed out in May 2011. At about the latter time, he said he learned about the Macau data law.

Peek said he told the court in June 2011 that Las Vegas Sands had electronic data pertaining to Jacobs, but that "I disclosed generally, I didn't disclose specifically" which documents were involved.

Bice noted during his questioning that Peek had not put that reason forward last June, when the hard drive issue came to a head.

Contact reporter Tim O'Reiley at
toreiley@reviewjournal.com or 702-387-5290.