Nevada Supreme Court backs Jon Gruden in Las Vegas Raiders email lawsuit against NFL
The Nevada Supreme Court handed former Las Vegas Raiders coach Jon Gruden a significant legal victory Monday, ruling 5-2 that his lawsuit against the NFL can proceed in open court rather than behind closed doors in arbitration overseen by the very commissioner he is suing.
Court finds arbitration clause ‘unconscionable’
In a ruling that reverses a previous decision by a three-judge panel, the full seven-member court determined that forcing Gruden into arbitration proceedings controlled by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell—who is named as a defendant in the lawsuit—would be fundamentally unfair.
“By its own unambiguous language, the NFL Constitution no longer applies to Gruden,” the justices wrote in their majority opinion. “If the NFL Constitution were to bind former employees, the Commissioner could essentially pick and choose which disputes to arbitrate.”
The court specifically found the arbitration clause in the NFL Constitution to be “unconscionable” and inapplicable to Gruden as a former employee of the league. This marks a significant departure from the previous 2-1 panel decision in May 2024 that would have sent the case to arbitration.
Legal battle stems from 2021 email scandal
Gruden’s lawsuit, filed in November 2021 in Clark County’s 8th Judicial District Court, alleges the NFL and Goodell orchestrated a “malicious and orchestrated campaign” to destroy his career by selectively leaking damaging emails to media outlets.
The emails, sent between 2011 and 2018 while Gruden worked as an ESPN analyst, contained racist, sexist, homophobic, and anti-gay language. They were discovered during the NFL’s investigation into workplace misconduct at the Washington franchise under former owner Daniel Snyder.
Gruden resigned from his position as Raiders head coach in October 2021, shortly after the emails were published by The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times. By resigning, he forfeited approximately $60 million remaining on his contract and lost numerous endorsement deals.
Allegations of selective targeting
Central to Gruden’s lawsuit is the claim that he was specifically targeted while correspondence from other NFL figures discovered during the same investigation remained sealed. His attorneys argue there is “no explanation or justification” for why only Gruden’s emails were leaked to the media.
The lawsuit seeks monetary damages for what Gruden characterizes as “Soviet-style character assassination” that effectively ended his NFL coaching career. He alleges tortious interference with his employment contract, negligence, and civil conspiracy against the league and its commissioner.
Victory for transparency in legal proceedings
“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,” said Adam Hosmer-Henner of McDonald Carano LLP, representing Gruden. “This victory further vindicates Coach Gruden’s reputation, and it clears the way to swiftly bringing him full justice and holding the NFL accountable.”
The ruling means the case will proceed in open court, where discovery processes could potentially reveal how and why Gruden’s emails were made public while others remained confidential. This transparency was a key goal for Gruden’s legal team from the outset.
NFL’s options narrowing
The NFL’s only remaining avenue to avoid a public trial would be an appeal to the United States Supreme Court. The league successfully pursued this strategy when the Missouri Supreme Court ruled against arbitration in the Rams relocation lawsuit, though there’s no guarantee the nation’s highest court would accept the case.
An NFL spokesman declined to comment on Monday’s ruling. The league had previously characterized Gruden’s lawsuit as “baseless” and maintained that Gruden alone was responsible for the content of his emails.
Broader implications for NFL arbitration
The ruling could have implications beyond Gruden’s case. Minnesota Vikings defensive coordinator Brian Flores, who is pursuing a racial discrimination lawsuit against the NFL in federal court in New York, may reference this decision in his ongoing legal battle, though Nevada court rulings are not binding on federal courts.
The five-justice majority expressed concern about the broad power the NFL’s arbitration clause would grant the commissioner, describing it as a “take-it-or-leave-it” contract of adhesion that individual employees cannot negotiate.
Justices Elissa Cadish and Kristina Pickering dissented, arguing that Gruden, as “a former Super Bowl champion coach and long-time media personality signing the most lucrative NFL coaching contract in history,” was sophisticated enough to understand the arbitration requirements when he signed his Raiders contract.
Long road ahead
While Monday’s ruling represents a significant victory for Gruden, it merely allows his case to proceed to the discovery phase in district court. The actual merits of his claims against the NFL have yet to be litigated, nearly four years after his resignation from the Raiders.
The case now returns to Clark County District Court, where both sides will engage in the discovery process that could shed light on how internal NFL communications became public and whether Gruden was intentionally targeted as he alleges.
For the Las Vegas Raiders organization, which has moved on with new leadership, the ongoing litigation serves as a reminder of one of the most tumultuous periods in franchise history following its relocation from Oakland to Las Vegas in 2020.
Image Sources: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/nevada-high-court-sides-with-jon-gruden-in-lawsuit-over-nfl-emails/ar-AA1KkPhN
Category: Sports
Subcategory: Raiders & NFL
Date: 08/12/2025
