Browsing: defamation

Jack Nicklaus, the 18-time major champion, has won a $50m verdict in a defamation case against his former company, bringing an end to one of golf’s most bitter business feuds.

A jury in Palm Beach County, Florida, found that Nicklaus Companies – the firm he founded and later sold – defamed him by spreading false claims that he had considered a $750m offer to become a public face of the Saudi-backed LIV Golf League and that he was no longer mentally fit to manage his business affairs. The six-person jury ruled that the company’s actions damaged the 85-year-old’s reputation and exposed him to “ridicule, hatred, mistrust, distrust or contemptâ€.

The verdict came after four and a half hours of deliberation. Nicklaus quietly embraced family and friends in the courtroom after the decision. “We tremendously appreciate the time that the jury put into this case,†said his attorney, Eugene Stearns. “They were extraordinarily conscientious and dedicated, and we’re happy that Jack’s been vindicated.â€

The dispute dates back nearly two decades. In 2007, Nicklaus sold the rights to his name, image and golf course design business to Nicklaus Companies for $145m in a deal financed by billionaire banker Howard Milstein. After stepping down from an executive role in 2017, Nicklaus was bound by a five-year noncompete clause that prevented him from taking on new design projects. When that restriction expired in 2022, the company sued him in New York, alleging that he had diverted business opportunities and secretly entertained talks with LIV Golf.

Nicklaus responded with a defamation suit of his own, accusing Milstein and other executives of planting false stories that he had “sold out†the PGA Tour – an organization he considered central to his legacy – for Saudi money. According to court documents, a Nicklaus Companies official had arranged for him to meet with Golf Saudi representatives in 2021 to discuss course design work. During that meeting, Nicklaus said, he was asked to take a leadership role with LIV Golf but immediately declined because of the PGA Tour’s opposition to the breakaway league.

The lawsuit also accused the company of circulating rumors that Nicklaus was suffering from dementia and could no longer handle his affairs. “What they said was, ‘You need to have the keys taken away,’†Stearns told ESPN. “It was unfortunate, but Jack’s reputation has now been restored.â€

Lawyers for Nicklaus Companies argued that the case was simply a business dispute and that Nicklaus’s stature in the game remained untarnished. “His reputation is as stellar as it’s always been,†defense attorney Barry Postman told jurors. But the jury sided with Nicklaus, though Milstein and company executive Andrew O’Brien were cleared of personal liability.

The verdict follows a separate court ruling earlier this year in which a New York judge affirmed that Nicklaus is free to use his own name and likeness in future golf ventures, even as the company retains the rights to sell branded apparel and equipment.

• 

  Mark SchlabachOct 20, 2025, 09:11 PM ET

  Close

  • Senior college football writer
  • Author of seven books on college football
  • Graduate of the University of Georgia

A Florida jury on Monday awarded Jack Nicklaus $50 million in his defamation lawsuit against billionaire banker Howard Milstein and other officials of the company that bears the 18-time major champion’s name.

Nicklaus, 85, filed the lawsuit in response to statements that Milstein and other Nicklaus Companies officials made in a previous lawsuit in a New York court.

In the defamation lawsuit, Nicklaus claimed the defendants suggested that he had considered a $750 million deal to become the face of the Saudi Arabian-financed LIV Golf League and disseminated those false claims to media outlets.

“It’s always hard in a defamation case to prove damages to reputation, because in particular for a guy like Jack, it’s always such a good one,” Nicklaus’ attorney, Eugene Stearns, told ESPN on Monday. “But I think what was important was the dispute that arose 3½ years ago when the company told the world that Jack was selling out the PGA Tour for the Saudi golf, when it was not true. So, we’re happy that Jack’s been vindicated.”

In court documents, the golfer’s attorneys wrote that a Nicklaus Companies official asked him to meet with Golf Saudi representatives in 2021 about designing a golf course in Saudi Arabia. During that meeting, Nicklaus learned that Golf Saudi wanted him to accept a leadership role in LIV Golf.

“According to Nicklaus, he had no interest in the offer and declined because he felt the PGA Tour was an important part of his legacy, and if the PGA was not in favor of a new league, he did not want to be involved,” the court documents said.

Nicklaus claimed the defendants also alleged that Nicklaus wasn’t mentally fit to manage his business affairs and was suffering from dementia.

“What they said was, ‘You need to have the keys taken away,'” Stearns said. “But the combination of all of that was unfortunate, and we’re happy that this is all soon going to be behind Jack, and hopefully the Nicklaus Companies will do fine, as well. But it was an unfortunate incident, and hopefully now it’s over.”

Nicklaus Companies said it paid the legendary golfer $145 million in May 2007 for exclusive rights to his golf course design services and marketing, promotional and branding rights.

Nicklaus resigned from the company in 2017, triggering a five-year noncompete clause in the deal that prevented him from designing golf courses on his own. Nicklaus stepped down from the company’s board in May 2022.

Not long after, Nicklaus Companies sued Nicklaus and his company GBI Investors, alleging tortious interference, breach of contract and breach of judiciary duty against Nicklaus. The complaint alleged that Nicklaus had diverted opportunities away from Nicklaus Companies for his personal benefit.

At the time of that lawsuit, Nicklaus said in a statement: “The claims made by Howard Milstein are untrue. Our relationship has been a difficult one, at best. I have little doubt about the outcome, but I don’t intend to make this a public spectacle, if it can be avoided.”

A Florida arbitrator ruled in July 2024 that Nicklaus was no longer restricted by the noncompete clause and was free to design golf courses.

In April, New York Civil Division Supreme Court Justice Joel M. Cohen ruled that Nicklaus had the right to use his own name, image and likeness, while Nicklaus Companies owned the trademarks it purchased and could continue to sell apparel and equipment with the Nicklaus’ name, “Golden Bear” moniker and logos.