Sands lawyer says Suen did nothing

By his own admission, Hong Kong businessman Richard Suen should receive nothing when a Clark County District Court jury concludes its deliberations in his civil lawsuit against the Las Vegas Sands Corp., according to the lead attorney representing the casino operator.

Houston-based attorney Rusty Hardin spent close to six hours Thursday piecing together how Suen, who claims Las Vegas Sands owes him millions for helping the company win a shared Macau casino concession in 2002, was not at all instrumental in delivering a gaming license to the operator.

"There is absolutely no evidence these folks (Suen) had anything to do with (Las Vegas Sands) winning a subconcession," Hardin said. "They have provided no evidence, only speculation."

Las Vegas Sands partnered with Hong Kong-based Galaxy Entertainment in February 2002 and was awarded one of three gaming licenses by the Macau government. The companies could not reach a contract agreement, however, and the partnership was dissolved. Macau then awarded Las Vegas Sands a subconcession.

Suen's attorneys are expected to present rebuttal arguments this morning, after which Judge Michelle Leavitt is expected to assign the case to the eight-person jury.

Suen testified during the trial that a series of meetings he arranged in Beijing in July 2001 between Chinese government officials and Las Vegas Sands executives was responsible for the casino operator winning its licensing bid. Suen believes the Chinese government wanted Las Vegas Sands to win one of the gaming licenses based on those meetings.

Hardin, however, told jurors they did not hear any evidence during more than five weeks of testimony that the meetings in Beijing helped the Las Vegas Sands' cause. In fact, he said, evidence showed that the China Council for Promotion of International Trade had arranged for the meetings, not Suen.

Hardin said Suen did not provide any evidence that the Mainland Chinese government exerted any influence over Macau's selection in the gaming concession process.

Hardin showed jurors comments from witnesses involved in the selection process who said there was no influence from China.

"It's like dancing with shadows," Hardin said. "They have changed their story since the beginning of the trial and during the trial as well."

Hardin was extremely critical of Suen throughout the day, calling him a "hustler without a product to peddle," and "a moocher who has never created anything on his own."

Suen's attorneys Wednesday asked jurors to award their client up to $100 million based on a $5 million success fee and 2 percent of the company's net profits from the Venetian Macau and Sands Macau.

Hardin said Suen deserves nothing, because he never made good on his promise to Las Vegas Sands executives throughout 2000 and 2001 to deliver a gaming license. Jurors were shown excerpts of Suen testimony early in the trial where he says he should receive nothing if he didn't deliver the gaming license.

"I believe you should take Mr. Suen at his word when he said it was all or nothing," Hardin said. "I believe you should award him nothing."

Hardin did tell jurors that testimony from Las Vegas Sands President Bill Weidner might have given them a road map if they wanted to place a value on Suen's services.

Weidner testified that Suen would have earned a consultant's fee of about $400,000 for about a year-and-a-half of work.

Contact reporter Howard Stutz at hstutz @reviewjournal.com or 702-477-3871.