Massachusetts and Steve Wynn, founder and former CEO of Wynn Resorts, have reportedly agreed to make a deal over details that have emerged in the investigation of alleged sexual misconduct on the part of Wynn. According to a report by the Associated Press, the two parties have reached a settlement agreement after Steve Wynn sued to prevent the release of data uncovered by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) during its investigation.
The MGC approved by way of a vote on Wednesday a measure that would allow its legal counsel to finalize an agreement with Wynn, which would see the embattled former casino boss dismiss the lawsuit he filed in Clark County District Court in Nevada. The details of the agreement were not provided, but the MGC acknowledged that the arrangements in the deal would “guarantee access to the report its investigators have compiled but have been unable to release.”
The commission had concluded its investigation of Wynn this past January, but was withholding the release of any information pending the outcome of the Nevada suit. The MGC has been looking into whether or not Wynn Resorts should still be able to hold a license to operate a casino in the state following the revelation of the alleged sexual misconduct by its founder at the beginning of last year.
AP points out that the MGC said that “reaching a settlement eliminates the uncertainty of protracted litigation, allows it to review the investigative report and proceed with a public hearing on the future of Encore Boston Harbor, the more than $2 billion waterfront resort slated to open in June in the Boston suburb of Everett.”
Wynn Resorts, which recently settled with the Nevada Gaming Control Board over allegations that it had known of the sexual misconduct but didn’t stop it, now expects a public hearing in Massachusetts to plead its case and try to retain its rights to the Boston project.
That settlement hasn’t quelled the problems facing Wynn Resorts. If anything, it only added fire to them. A lawsuit submitted by shareholders has used the opportunity to prove that the company is negligent for allowing its stock price to plummet, costing the shareholders potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in earnings.
