LAS VEGAS (KTNV) — In a 2-1 decision, the Nevada Supreme Court has ruled against former Las Vegas Raiders coach Jon Gruden and stated he is subject to the National Football League's arbitration process.
Gruden originally filed a lawsuit against the NFL on Nov. 11, 2021 in the aftermath of an email scandal.
From 2011 to 2018, Gruden sent emails when he worked as a sports broadcaster for ESPN, which included racist, misogynist, and homophobic comments.
Gruden's attorneys said the NFL first became aware of these emails during an investigation into the Washington Commanders football team. The team and its owner, Dan Snyder, were investigated after claims of workplace harassment. The complaint said the NFL gathered more than 650,000 emails as part of the investigation, including Gruden's, and sat on them for months. They claim the league released the emails intentionally in a "campaign" to force Gruden to resign.
Gruden eventually resigned as head coach for the Raiders on Oct. 11, 2021.
RELATED LINK: Timeline describes what happened leading up to Gruden resigning as Raiders head coach
Court documents previously showed that Gruden said the NFL arbitration process doesn't apply to him since he was forced to resign.
On Oct. 12, 2022, a district court agreed with Gruden and denied the league's motion to compel arbitration. At the time, the district court judge stated arbitration didn't apply.
However, on Tuesday, the Nevada Supreme Court said the district court's ruling was incorrect for several reasons.
- The employment agreement incorporated the NFL Constitution by reference.
- The NFL Constitution entered in evidence was sufficiently shown to be the version at the time of the signing.
- The NFL Constitution contains a valid arbitration clause covering disputes involving Gruden that arise in the course of his employment with the Raiders.
- The NFL Constitution arbitration clause is neither circular nor illusory.
So what does all of that mean?
The court's ruling states Gruden's claims that the NFL leaked his emails and interfered with his employment agreement happened during his time with the Raiders and his status as a former employee doesn't mean arbitration can't take place.
The ruling also states that Gruden acknowledged in the employment agreement that he had read the NFL Constitution and understood its terms so he "cannot now claim surprise at its contents."
"Though Gruden could not negotiate with the Raiders as to the terms of the NFL Constitution, he had the ability to negotiate the employment contract as a whole — such as for more pay, a longer contract, added control over team decisions, or its other terms," the ruling reads in part. "Because we cannot say Gruden and the Raiders had unequal bargaining power or that the employment agreement as a whole was a 'take it or leave it' offer, we conclude oppression is not present here."
Gruden has previously stated arbitration wouldn't be fair since NFL officials, like Commissioner Roger Goodell, could lead those proceedings. However, the Nevada Supreme Court said it is not clear that Goodell will act as an arbitrator and in the past, the he has designated third-party arbitrators to hear disputes.
The ruling was signed by Chief Justice Elissa F. Cadish and Justice Kristina Pickering.
Court documents also show the ruling wasn't unanimous, with Justice Linda Marie Bell disagreeing and saying arbitration doesn't apply to former employees.
Gruden's attorney, Adam Hosmer-Henner, told the Associated Press that he will appeal to the full seven-member state high court to hear the case.
“The panel’s split decision would leave Nevada an outlier where an employer can unilaterally determine whether an employee’s dispute must go to arbitration and also allow the employer to adjudicate the dispute as the arbitrator," the attorney said.
Attorney Kannon Shanmugam, representing the NFL, declined to comment on the ruling.
You can read the full ruling below.
Nevada Supreme Court ruling on Jon Gruden, NFL case by jarah.wright on Scribd
