Doe v. Wynn Resorts, Ltd.
| Decision Date | 06 February 2023 |
| Docket Number | 2:19-cv-01904-GMN-VCF |
| Parties | JUDY DOE NO. 1, et al., Plaintiffs, v. WYNN RESORTS, LIMITED, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Nevada |
Pending before the Court is Defendants Wynn Las Vegas, LLC and Wynn Resorts, Limited's[1] (collectively “Defendants'”) Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No 115). Plaintiffs Judy Doe No. 1, Judy Doe No. 2, Judy Doe No 3, Judy Doe No. 4, Judy Doe No. 5, Judy Doe No. 6, Judy Doe No. 7, Judy Doe No. 8, and Judy Doe No. 9 (collectively “Judy Doe Plaintiffs”)[2]filed a Response, (ECF No. 136), to which Defendants filed a Reply, (ECF No. 144).
Further pending before the Court is Defendant Wynn Las Vegas, LLC's unopposed Motion to Seal, (ECF No. 117), and unopposed Motions for Leave to File Excess Pages, (ECF Nos. 114, 142).
For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Further, the Court GRANTS Defendant Wynn Las Vegas, LLC's Motions for Leave to File Excess Pages[3] and DENIES it's Motion to Seal.[4]
This case arises from Steve Wynn's alleged sexual harassment of the Judy Doe Plaintiffs and other unnamed individuals, and the subsequent response taken by Defendants.[5] The Judy
Doe Plaintiffs all worked for Wynn Las Vegas at either the Wynn or Encore Salon (collectively, “the Salon”).[6] (SAC ¶ 27, ECF No. 106). The Judy Doe Plaintiffs allege that Steve Wynn personally selected high-level executives who “facilitated, enabled, and covered up decades” of his “sex-based” misconduct. (Id. ¶ 28). The Judy Doe Plaintiffs further contend that these executives provided Steve Wynn with access to their private information, including their cell phone numbers and work schedules. (Id. ¶ 29). The facts underlying the full extent of Steve Wynn's alleged conduct towards the individual Judy Doe Plaintiffs is outlined below.
Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 1 began working at Wynn Las Vegas in 2004. (Id. ¶ 97). Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 1 contends that Steve Wynn obtained her phone number and began making inappropriate requests, including asking for photographs of “certain parts of [Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 1's] anatomy.” (Id. ¶ 98). In 2008, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 1 became a makeup artist at the Wynn Salon. (Id. ¶ 100). Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 1 maintains that Steve Wynn continued his pattern of inappropriate behavior at her new position by “asking her out and . . . being overly familiar to her in the presence of other clients.” (Id. ¶ 101). In 2012 to 2013, and periodically throughout 2017, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 1 did Steve Wynn's makeup at his private villa “where he was inappropriately clothed and positioned.” (Id. ¶ 102).
In 2006, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 2 began working as a manicurist at Wynn Las Vegas before transitioning to a position at the Encore Salon in 2008. (Id. ¶ 117). On many occasions,[7]Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 2 performed “in-room” manicure services for Steve Wynn at his private villa, during which he “subjected Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 2 to sexual harassment, including by initiating inappropriate physical touching[.]” (Id. ¶ 118). Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 2 feared retaliation by Steve Wynn or Wynn Las Vegas if she complained about his conduct. (Id. ¶ 119). Additionally, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 2 alleges that she otherwise avoided participating in Wynn Las Vegas's “in-room” manicure services program because the program exposed employees “to many questionable and uncomfortable situations, including guest drug abuse and alcohol abuse, indecent exposure, and inappropriate physical advances by guests.” (Id. ¶ 120).
Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 3 served as a manicurist at Wynn Las Vegas. (Id. ¶ 134). From 2009 to 2012, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 3 performed “in-room” manicure services for Steve Wynn at his private villa, during which he subjected her to sexual advances and degrading behavior, including “physically touching her inappropriately (grabbing her hands and forcing her to massage him near his genitals during a manicure or pedicure),” wearing inappropriate clothing, and making lewd comments such as “[i]f you were mine, you would never work another day in your life again.” (Id. ¶ 135). Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 3 further alleges that she participated in Wynn Las Vegas's “in-room” manicure service program, which exposed her to unsafe situations while providing in-room salon services to customers. (Id. ¶ 139). Specifically, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 3 contends that she faced intoxicated customers who sometimes engaged in sexual acts while she provided services, and customers offering to have sex with her. (Id.).
Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 4 was employed at Wynn Las Vegas starting in April 2005 before transitioning to a role as a manicurist at the Encore Salon in 2008. (Id. ¶ 151). From 2006 to 2008, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 4 provided manicure services to Steve Wynn at his private villa, where he allegedly made inappropriate inquiries about her sex life, in addition to inappropriately touching her. (Id. ¶ 151). Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 4 also participated in the Wynn Las Vegas's “in-room” manicure services program and maintains that the program exposed her to unsafe situations while providing in-room salon service to customers. (Id. ¶ 164).
Beginning in November 2008, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 5 served as a makeup artist since at Wynn Las Vegas. (Id. ¶ 175). From 2008 to 2017, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 5 applied Steve Wynn's makeup at his office or personal villa where he inappropriately “wrap[ed] his arms around her, using her body to maneuver himself in his chair, [and] w[ore] only underwear,” among other unspecified actions. (Id. ¶ 177).
Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 6 was a manicurist with Wynn Las Vegas. (Id. ¶ 200). She is no longer employed at Wynn Resorts. (Id.). Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 6 gave Steve Wynn manicures in his private office and villa,[8] during which he sexually harassed her by “touch[ing] her, sp[eaking] directions to her in a very low and seemingly seductive voice, and . . . inappropriately manuerver[ing] his body closer to her during” manicures. (Id. ¶ 202). Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 6 further alleges that when she went to Steve Wynn's private villa, his German Shepherd was seated nearby to intimidate her. (Id. ¶ 205). On one occasion in 2017, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 6 gave Steve Wynn a private manicure during which he “managed to engage in some disgusting physical contact during the manicure that made her extremely uncomfortable.” (Id. ¶ 206).
Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 7 began working as a manicurist at Wynn Las Vegas in February, 2006. (Id. ¶ 207). As with the other Judy Doe Plaintiffs, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 7 gave Steve Wynn private manicures and pedicures,[9] where he inappropriately forced her hand into his crotch area, touched her thigh, and asked her inappropriate questions. (Id. ¶ 222). As with Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 6, Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 7 further alleges that Steve Wynn used his German Shepherd to intimidate her. (Id. ¶ 221).
Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 8 began working at Wynn Las Vegas in March 2005, and later became a manicurist at the Wynn Salon in 2008. (Id. ¶ 238). On many occasions,[10] Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 8 was subjected to sexually harassing conduct, including Steve Wynn talking about sex and encouraging Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 8 to watch pornography, touching her inappropriately, and sexualizing “what should be a simple manicure.” (Id. ¶ 239).
Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 9 began working at Wynn Las Vegas in March 2005. (Id. ¶ 259). On many occasions,[11] Steve Wynn subjected Judy Plaintiff No. 9 to sexually harassing conduct by talking about sex and encouraging Judy Doe Plaintiff No. 9 to watch pornography and touching her inappropriately. (Id. ¶ 260).
In addition to the allegations specific to the individual Judy Doe Plaintiffs, the following facts are common to all Judy Doe Plaintiffs.
In early 2018, various national media outlets began investigating Steve Wynn's workplace misconduct. (Id. ¶ 30). According to the Judy Doe Plaintiffs, on January 17, 2018, Wynn Las Vegas convened a meeting for Salon employees. (Id. ¶ 32). At that meeting, Maurice Wooden (“Wooden”), the then-president of Wynn Las Vegas, and Troy Mitchum (“Mitchum”), the then-president of Human Resources at Wynn Las Vegas, directed Salon employees to notify Mitchum if reporters contacted them inquiring about Steve Wynn's alleged misconduct. (Id. ¶ 32). Wooden emphasized that Salon employees should not talk to reporters. (Id. ¶ 33). On January 26, 2018, numerous national media outlets published reports of Steve Wynn's sexual misconduct. (Id. ¶ 35). That same day, Wooden released a memorandum stating that Wynn Las Vegas remained “supportive” of Steve Wynn. (Id. ¶ 36). The Judy Doe Plaintiffs interpreted Wooden's memorandum as a directive to “stifle the speech of” employees who were victims of Steve Wynn's conduct. (Id. ¶ 37). Following this media exposure, the Massachusetts and Nevada Gaming Commissions respectively began investigating Wynn Las Vegas. (Id. ¶ 38)
On January 31, 2018, Steve Wynn spoke at a mandatory meeting for Salon employees. (Id. ¶ 39). Defendants' high-level executives, security personnel, and board members were present for the meeting. (Id. ¶ 40). Steve Wynn requested Salon employees “raise their hands if they ever felt assaulted or abused by him ....” (Id. ¶ 41). The Judy Doe Plaintiffs allege this was a ploy to pressure the “Salon employees to ‘out...
To continue reading
Request your trial