Florida Jury Awards Jack Nicklaus $50 Million in Defamation Case Against Nicklaus Companies

Florida Jury Awards Jack Nicklaus $50 Million in Defamation Lawsuit Against Nicklaus Companies

A Florida jury has awarded legendary golfer Jack Nicklaus $50 million in his defamation lawsuit against Nicklaus Companies, a firm owned by billionaire banker Howard Milstein. The case stemmed from false claims made by Milstein and other executives that Nicklaus had considered a $750 million deal to lead the Saudi-backed LIV Golf League—an assertion Nicklaus vehemently denied. The lawsuit highlights a fierce legal battle involving business disputes, personal reputation, and complex rights over Nicklaus’s name, image, and likeness.

Key Points

The Defamation Lawsuit: Background and Jury Decision

Jack Nicklaus, 85, launched the defamation lawsuit in response to claims made by Nicklaus Companies officials during a previous New York court lawsuit. These officials suggested that Nicklaus had contemplated a multimillion-dollar deal to become the face of LIV Golf, a league funded by Saudi Arabian interests. According to Nicklaus’s attorneys, these assertions were false and significantly harmful to his reputation.

Attorney Eugene Stearns emphasized the difficulty of proving reputational damage in defamation cases, particularly involving a figure as respected as Nicklaus. Nevertheless, Stearns told ESPN that the key issue was that Nicklaus's company falsely accused him of "selling out the PGA Tour for the Saudi golf league," which was untrue. The verdict thus served to vindicate Nicklaus’s name.

Court documents revealed that a Nicklaus Companies official invited Nicklaus to meet with representatives from Golf Saudi in 2021 regarding the design of a signature golf course in Saudi Arabia. During this meeting, Nicklaus discovered Golf Saudi wished to offer him a leadership role in LIV Golf. He declined, citing his loyalty to the PGA Tour and its importance to his legacy.

In addition to the false business accusations, Nicklaus alleged the defendants made disparaging claims about his mental health, including assertions that he was unfit to manage his affairs and suffered from dementia. Stearns described these claims as part of a harmful campaign aimed at discrediting Nicklaus.

The Palm Beach Post reported that the jury found Nicklaus Companies actively participated in publishing false facts that subjected Nicklaus to "ridicule, hatred, mistrust, distrust or contempt." However, Milstein and executive Andrew O’Brien were ruled not personally liable.

Legal and Business Disputes Between Nicklaus and Milstein

The origins of the legal dispute trace back to a 2007 agreement where Nicklaus Companies paid Nicklaus $145 million for exclusive rights to his golf course design services, marketing, branding, and promotional usage of his name. Nicklaus resigned from his company role in 2017, triggering a five-year noncompete clause preventing him from independently designing golf courses. Nicklaus left the company's board in May 2022.

Shortly after his departure, Nicklaus Companies initiated a lawsuit against Nicklaus and his company, GBI Investors, accusing them of tortious interference, breach of contract, and judicial duty violations. They alleged Nicklaus had improperly diverted business opportunities for personal gain. Nicklaus denied the claims, describing the relationship with Milstein as difficult but was confident about the legal outcome.

A Florida arbitrator eventually ruled in July 2024 that Nicklaus no longer remained bound by the noncompete clause and was free to design golf courses again. Earlier, in April, New York Supreme Court Justice Joel M. Cohen confirmed in a ruling that Nicklaus retained rights to use his name, image, and likeness (NIL) personally, while Nicklaus Companies retained the trademarks it owned and could continue selling merchandise under Nicklaus’s name and "Golden Bear" branding. The ruling also allowed Nicklaus Companies to design golf courses independently of Nicklaus, while also letting Nicklaus pursue his own design business.

Howard Milstein’s Role and Business Ventures

Howard Milstein, chairman and CEO of New York Private Bank & Trust and Emigrant Bank, is a prominent businessman and philanthropist. Representing the third generation of the Milstein family, he leads diverse real estate holdings and entrepreneurial ventures. Milstein is active in philanthropic organizations such as the New York Blood Center and the Milstein Medical Asian American Partnership Foundation. He also serves in governance roles at Cornell University, Weill Cornell Medical College, and advises Harvard Law School.

Among Milstein’s notable initiatives is Grand Central Tech (GCT), New York City’s leading technology accelerator aimed at supporting startups and entrepreneurial growth. Established at 335 Madison Avenue—the site previously housing Facebook's New York offices—GCT fosters innovation by offering startups a rent-free first year and no equity demands, focusing on sustainable success. The accelerator benefits from strong partnerships with major corporations like Google, Microsoft, JPMorgan Chase, and PepsiCo, and is designed to catalyze a vibrant tech ecosystem in Midtown Manhattan.

Curated by Milstein and his son Michael, who chairs GCT’s board, the accelerator has selected hundreds of startups, emphasizing diversity and inclusion by supporting founders who are women, veterans, or people of color. The program combines mentorship, recruiting resources, and financial support with proximity to established corporate hubs.

Continued Legal Tensions and Defamation Trial

Despite legal rulings affirming Nicklaus’s rights, the defamation lawsuit persisted. Nicklaus’s legal team accused Milstein and Nicklaus Companies of trying to “destroy his reputation” out of resentment over his departure. Allegations included the planting of false stories about Nicklaus’s health, including dementia claims, which Milstein’s lawyers deny.

The defamation trial commenced on September 29 and was expected to last three weeks. This latest ruling awarding Nicklaus $50 million marks a major victory in a protracted legal battle involving personal reputation, intellectual property rights, and complex business disputes.

The Broader Context: Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) Rights for Retired Athletes

The dispute between Nicklaus and Milstein underscores the intricate nature of NIL rights for retired sports figures. Nicklaus’s conflict with Nicklaus Companies over who controls his name and likeness rights reflects growing challenges for athletes transitioning from active competition to business ventures leveraging their personal brand.

As the sports and business worlds increasingly intertwine, clear contractual frameworks and respect for individual branding rights become critical. The case also illustrates how business partnerships can deteriorate into public legal confrontations when personal and professional interests clash.

Conclusion

The $50 million defamation award to Jack Nicklaus by a Florida jury represents a defining moment in a complex legal saga involving powerful figures in sports and business. It highlights the challenges faced by iconic athletes in protecting their legacy and navigating business relationships post-retirement. Meanwhile, Howard Milstein continues to influence the financial, real estate, and tech landscapes in New York City, demonstrating his multifaceted role as a business leader and innovator. The outcome of this case could serve as a precedent for similar disputes involving individuals’ name, image, and likeness rights in sports and beyond.