Jon Gruden won a skirmish Monday in his civil lawsuit against the NFL and commissioner Roger Goodell that has been plodding through a state court for four years.
The Nevada Supreme Court determined in a 5-2 ruling that Gruden was not required by the NFL to participate in arbitration overseen by Goodell, who is a defendant in the lawsuit alleging that a “malicious and orchestrated campaign” was used to destroy Gruden’s coaching career by leaking offensive emails he had sent years earlier.
Advertisement
The court said that the NFL attempt to force Gruden into arbitration was “unconscionable and does not apply to Gruden as a former employee.”
Gruden’s resignation as coach of the Las Vegas Raiders in October 2021 made him exempt from a provision in the NFL Constitution mandating arbitration, the court ruled.
“If the NFL Constitution were to bind former employees, the Commissioner could essentially pick and choose which disputes to arbitrate,” the ruling stated.
The decision appears to clear the way for Gruden’s lawsuit to proceed. The NFL can appeal to the United States Supreme Court but so far has declined to comment.
Advertisement
Read more: Jon Gruden emails were part of June court filing by WFT owner Dan Snyder
“We’re very pleased with the Nevada Supreme Court’s decision, not just for Coach Gruden but for all employees facing an employer’s unfair arbitration process,” Gruden attorney Adam Hosmer-Henner said in a statement. “This victory further validates Coach Gruden’s reputation, and it clears the way to swiftly bringing him full justice and holding the NFL accountable.”
Goodell and the NFL have denied leaking the emails, which were published by the Wall Street Journal and New York Times.
“In contrast to the formalities of the Washington Football Team investigation, Defendants’ treatment of Gruden was a Soviet-style character assassination,” the lawsuit alleged. “There was no warning and no process. Defendants held the emails for months until they were leaked to the national media in the middle of the Raiders’ season in order to cause maximum damage to Gruden.”
Advertisement
Gruden’s email correspondence with former Washington Commanders executive Bruce Allen occurred from 2011 to 2018 when Gruden was a color analyst for ESPN’s “Monday Night Football” and included racist, misogynistic and homophobic comments. The emails came to light during a league investigation into the workplace culture of the Washington team and owner Dan Snyder.
Read more: Want to attend 2026 World Cup games for free? FIFA needs 65,000 volunteers
“It’s ridiculous the league thought they could cherry-pick emails from years ago, when I wasn’t even a coach and try to end my career,” Gruden said in a statement to ESPN two years ago. “At a minimum, I deserved the opportunity to respond and receive some due process.”
The Nevada Supreme Court agreed, reconsidering the findings of a smaller panel of the court that made a 2-1 decision more than a year ago to dismiss Gruden’s lawsuit. That ruling came after a district judge in 2022 rejected the NFL’s bid to dismiss the lawsuit outright or to order arbitration overseen by Goodell.
Advertisement
Nevada Supreme Court justices Kristina Pickering and Elissa Cadish dissented from the ruling Monday, suggesting that Gruden should have been aware of language in his contract stipulating arbitration.
“As a former Super Bowl champion coach and long-time media personality signing the most lucrative NFL coaching contract in history, while being represented by one of the country’s leading sports agents, Gruden was the very definition of a sophisticated party,” Pickering wrote. “Though Gruden could not negotiate the terms of the NFL Constitution, he had the ability to negotiate the contract as a whole — such as for more pay, a longer contract, added control over team decisions, or its other terms.”
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Source link
