Jon Gruden has achieved a significant legal victory in his ongoing lawsuit against the NFL and Commissioner Roger Goodell. On Monday, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled in favor of Gruden, declining to send his complaint into the league’s arbitration process.
With a decisive 5-2 majority, the court upheld a prior ruling from the district court, reversing a decision made by a panel of the Nevada Supreme Court in May 2024 that would have allowed for arbitration.
Following this latest ruling, the case is set to proceed publicly unless the NFL decides to appeal. NFL spokesperson Brian McCarthy confirmed on Tuesday that the league intends to do just that, seeking a rehearing before the Nevada Supreme Court.
The court’s majority opinion stated that the arbitration clause outlined in the NFL Constitution does not apply to Gruden, who was a former employee when he filed his lawsuit. The court described the use of such a clause in this context as ‘unconscionable.’
According to the court’s statement, ‘By its own unambiguous language, the NFL Constitution no longer applies to Gruden.’
The court also dismissed arguments made by the NFL that suggested arbitration language in Gruden’s contract with the Raiders would limit his ability to take legal action against the NFL. The ruling emphasized that ‘The presence of an arbitration clause does not bind a party to arbitrate any claim, with any other party, at any time.’
Gruden’s attorney, Adam Hosmer-Henner, expressed satisfaction with the ruling, stating, ‘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. This victory further vindicates Coach Gruden’s reputation and clears the way to swiftly bring him full justice and hold the NFL accountable.’
In November 2021, Gruden filed his lawsuit against the NFL and Goodell after resigning as head coach of the Raiders. This resignation occurred after racially insensitive, homophobic, and sexist emails were leaked during an investigation into the workplace environment at the NFL’s Washington franchise.
In his lawsuit, Gruden claimed that these emails were leaked as part of a ‘malicious and orchestrated campaign’ aimed at damaging his career and reputation. He argued that the NFL and Commissioner Goodell sought to destroy his standing as the former head coach of the Las Vegas Raiders.
Gruden asserted that he felt ‘forced to resign’ once these emails became public. The emails in question were sent while he was working as a commentator for ESPN from 2011 to 2018, directed to Bruce Allen, who was the president of Washington at the time. The investigation into sexual harassment and workplace culture at Washington reviewed over 650,000 emails connected to Allen.
The NFL’s arbitration clauses are included in both employee contracts and the NFL Constitution, and Gruden’s employment contract also references the Constitution. However, Gruden previously stated in a declaration that he had never received a copy of the NFL Constitution related to the league’s motion to compel arbitration.
He maintains that the arbitration provision in his contract was tied solely to his relationship with the Raiders, not the NFL, contesting that the arbitration process in the Constitution is now irrelevant as he is no longer an employee.
Ultimately, the Nevada Supreme Court concluded that neither arbitration clause applied in this instance. The court stated, ‘We conclude the arbitration clause in the NFL Constitution is unconscionable and does not apply to Gruden as a former employee.’
As a result, the judgment of the district court was affirmed, allowing Gruden’s case to move forward in public court, a significant development in this high-profile legal battle.
image source from：nytimes
