Wynn Las Vegas has hit another snagtrying to toss out a two-year-old lawsuit against the company, alleging that the venue accepted money sourced from a $45m cannabis-vape Ponzi scheme.
As reported by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, a US district judge decided that parts of the complaint against Wynn can be allowed to move, dismissing the part that specifically alleged negligence on the part of the company, as well as the unjust-enrichment claims.
However, Judge Anne Traum has permitted plaintiffs to pursue their case against the company, alleging that Wynn extended "VIP treatment" to David Bunevacz, thus helping him further legitimize his illegal enterprise. The original complaint was filed in October 2024.
Bunevacz was allowed to gamble an estimated $3.8m at Wynn Las Vegas, Canadian businessman Stephen Shefsky and his company, James Bay Resources Ltd, state in their complaint, without allegedly running mandatory source of funds checks.
Bunevacz has already been sentenced and is serving a 17.5-year sentence in a federal prison for fraud. Prosecutors proved in court that Bunevacz used proceeds from investors he received with the specific goal of developing the cannabis-vape venture to fund his private lifestyle, including a total of $8m spent gambling at Las Vegas casinos.
Pertinent to the complaint specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Wynn Las Vegas offered Shefsky a free room in November 2018 so that he may meet Bunevacz and solicit further investment.
Following this meeting, James Bay, Shefsky’s company, loaned $1.5m to Bunevacz’s venture, and Shefsky forwarded him $1.1m across two loans personally, with the plaintiffs later investing another $3m in Bunevacz companies.
The money was forwarded to a Wells Fargo account which was reportedly used by Bunevacz to make payments at Wynn Las Vegas.
For the time being, only the part of the complaint filed underthe receipt-of-stolen-property statute in Nevada remains. Based on this statute, the victims of property crime may sue any third party that has received or possesses their stolen property, provided the circumstances allowed for said party to "reasonably have known" that the property was stolen.
While the case - or at least part of it is allowed to continue, Judge Traum made it very clear that the decision does not establish guilt in any way, confirming that Wynn may not have known about these developments at all whatsoever.
Image credit: Unsplash.com
