A 750$ Million deal for a “job probably similar to the one Greg [Norman] is doing.” “A dementia patient who needs to have his car keys taken away,” – a viral story eventually picked up by 70 outlets, as per Golfweek. These were same of the smears leveled at Jack Nicklaus by a company he once called his own. What followed was a complicated defamation battle, as the 18-time major looked for a fair trial. Finally, the justice has been served. The Golden Bear has been vindicated.

Nicklaus has emerged victorious in the defamation lawsuit against Nicklaus Companies, the firm owned by billionare banker Howard Milstein. On Monday, the Florida jury awarded Nicklaus $50 million in reparations to the damages he and his team claimed were caused to the golfer’s reputation.

The lawsuit was filed in response to several alleged statements made by Milstein and other company officials, especially by the head of the company Andrew O’Brien, in a separate New York court case. As per Nicklaus and his team, those statements falsely suggested that the 85-year-old golf icon had considered a $750 million deal to become the face of Saudi backed LIV Golf.

“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’ lawyer, Eugene Stearns, told ESPN. “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.”

The court documents reveal that Nicklaus Companies official had asked Nicklaus to meet with Golf Saudi representatives in 2021 for discussions regarding designing a golf course in Saudi. During that meeting, the golfer was informed that they wanted him to accept a leadership role in the ‘breakaway league.’ Nicklaus, who has been known to carve out the legacy of the PGA Tour, however straightaway refuesd.

But these were not the only allegations. Another defamatory statement allegedly made by Nicklaus Companies claimed that Nicklaus suffered from dementia, and was unable to be left on his own.

In a response, the Nicklaus launched the case. Two years later, he walks away with money, and his once lost reputation.

“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.”

The Palm Beach Post had earlier reported that the jury found Nicklaus Companies have been actively participating in publishing false claims that damaged Nicklaus’ reputation. All this further exposed him to “ridicule, hatred, mistrust, distrust or contempt.” Despite all, Milstein and O’Brien have not been personally held liable.

What’s interesting is that company has since the beginning vehemenlty denied all of these allgeations. Gary Malone, the company’s lawyer had stated that if they wanted to make any negative publicity regarding the golfer, they could have simply sent out a press release. “There’s no evidence…That was simply made up,” the attorney had said, as several attempts were made to have the case dismissed. In fact, just days ago the defence seemed to have the win in their bag with their impressive strategical move.

But now, the case has finally been put to rest. And although Nicklaus still might have to fight for the rights of a comapny he started on his own, this little win can offer him some much needed respite.

Having said that, what is the controversial history of Jack Nicklaus and his friend turned foe Howard Milstein?

Jack Nicklaus’s complicated legal battle

The entire dispute emerges from the time, when in 2007 Jack Nicklaus wanted to merge his Golden Bear International (GBI) into a newly formed company. That company which we know today by the name of Nicklaus Cos.

Nicklaus who had an interest in building and designing golf courses, wanted to upscale his venture, That was the time Howard Milstein entered the scene, with a whopping $145 million to finance Nicklaus’s dream. The moment the money went into the deal, the partnership which once were clearly laid out (51% for Nicklaus, 49% for Milstein and his Emigrant Bank), became too lopsided.

Eventually, Nicklaus resigned from the company in 2017 which triggered a five-year noncompete clause. Now that prevented the old golfer to design any golf course independently. Moreover, Milstein and co.(now owner of the Nicklaus Companies) also took the rights of Nicklaus’s NIL. Shortly after, they sued him and his company GBI Investors, alleging them of tortious intereference, breach of contracts, and breach of fiduciary duty. At that time, Nicklaus dismissed those allegations.

The courts have since clarified Nicklaus rights. A Florida arbitrator ruled in July 2024 that he was no longer restricted by the noncompete clause and could design golf course freely. At the same time also allowing to have his rights on his name, image and likeness (NIL). At the same time, Nicklaus Companies retained ownership of the trademarks it had purchased, allowing it to continue selling apparel and equipment under the Nicklaus brand and “Golden Bear” moniker.