685 Fed.Appx. 578 (9th Cir. 2017), 15-15639, Wynn v. Chanos

Docket Nº:15-15639
Citation:685 Fed.Appx. 578
Party Name:STEPHEN WYNN; WYNN RESORTS LIMITED, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JAMES CHANOS, Defendant-Appellee,
Attorney:For STEPHEN WYNN, WYNN RESORTS LIMITED, Plaintiff - Appellants: Lawrence Michael Cirelli, Attorney, Hanson Bridgett LLP, San Francisco, CA; Mitchell Joel Langberg, Attorney, Brownstein Hyatt Farber & Schreck LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Megan Oliver Thompson, Attorney, Hanson Bridgett LLP, San Francisco...
Judge Panel:Before: FERNANDEZ, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:March 28, 2017
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 578

685 Fed.Appx. 578 (9th Cir. 2017)

STEPHEN WYNN; WYNN RESORTS LIMITED, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

JAMES CHANOS, Defendant-Appellee,

No. 15-15639

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

March 28, 2017

Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California March 14, 2017.

Editorial Note:

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. D.C. No. 3:14-cv-04329-WHO. William Horsley Orrick, III, District Judge, Presiding.

Wynn v. Chanos, (N.D. Cal., June 19, 2015, Mar. 3, 2015)

For STEPHEN WYNN, WYNN RESORTS LIMITED, Plaintiff - Appellants: Lawrence Michael Cirelli, Attorney, Hanson Bridgett LLP, San Francisco, CA; Mitchell Joel Langberg, Attorney, Brownstein Hyatt Farber & Schreck LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Megan Oliver Thompson, Attorney, Hanson Bridgett LLP, San Francisco, CA.

For JAMES CHANOS, Defendant - Appellee: Gary L. Bostwick, Attorney, Bostwick Law, Los Angeles, CA; Kenneth G. Hausman, Attorney, Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin PC, San Francisco, CA; Steven Mayer, Douglas Winthrop, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, San Francisco, CA.

Before: FERNANDEZ, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM [*]

Stephen Wynn and Wynn Resorts Limited (hereafter collectively " Wynn" ) appeal the district court's judgment in favor of James Chanos. The district court granted Chanos' motion to dismiss Wynn's first amended complaint1 and his motion to strike that complaint,2 and awarded attorney's fees against Wynn.3 We affirm.

(1) Wynn asserts that the district court erred when it determined that Wynn had not spelled out a cause of action for slander. We disagree.

Wynn had to " plead[] factual content that allow[ed] the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant [was] liable for the misconduct alleged" and could not simply " plead[] facts that [were] 'merely consistent with' [the] defendant's liability." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009). That is, the claim of liability had to be plausible. Id. In the area of...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP