Jon Gruden just scored what many observers see as a critical breakthrough in his legal fight with the NFL.
On October 2, the Nevada Supreme Court unanimously declined the league’s request to rehear a decision that strips the NFL of its leverage to push Gruden‘s case into arbitration. The move clears another hurdle for Gruden and intensifies pressure on Commissioner Roger Goodell.
This marks Gruden‘s second significant legal victory against the league in the broader saga sparked by the leaked emails that led to his resignation in 2021.
The centerpiece dispute involves whether Gruden‘s claims, which arise from emails containing offensive remarks about Goodell and others, must be resolved under the NFL’s arbitration rules or in public court.
The league long argued that its constitution binds even former employees, thereby forcing disputes into private arbitration.
Gruden has opposed this, contending that arbitration would unfairly insulate the league, especially when high-ranking figures like the commissioner are defendants.
In August, justices had already sided with Gruden, issuing a 5-2 ruling that deemed the NFL’s arbitration clause “unconscionable” when applied to a former employee. That decision allowed Gruden‘s lawsuit to proceed in open court.
When the NFL petitioned for a rehearing, the full bench declined in a 7-0 order, leaving the prior ruling intact.
Now, per Mark Maske on X:
“The Nevada Supreme Court denied the NFL’s appeal for a rehearing of the court’s decision in August to allow Jon Gruden’s lawsuit against the league to be heard in court rather than being forced into the NFL’s arbitration process. The NFL can appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
Gruden‘s team celebrated the outcome as more than a procedural win. In a message to The Associated Press, his attorney, Adam Hosmer-Henner, said, “We’re obviously pleased with the court’s decision.” The league, meanwhile, declined to comment immediately.
Critically, the unanimous denial leaves the earlier interpretation standing: the arbitration clause in the NFL Constitution cannot be compelled in this case, especially when it might grant Goodell or his delegates jurisdiction over his own conduct, a clear conflict, the court observed.
That underlying August ruling, which is now affirmed by today’s order, found that forcing Gruden into arbitration “is unconscionable” because he was not an NFL employee at the time the emails in question were sent.
The ruling also rejected the NFL’s attempt to rely on equitable estoppel to bind his coaching contract to internal arbitration.
What’s next, and what it means for both sides
With Nevada’s top court refusing to reopen the case, Gruden is now closer to a full trial in state court. That raises the prospect of depositions, document discovery, and public scrutiny of internal NFL operations, outcomes the league has long sought to avoid.
Yet this legal battle is far from over. The NFL is expected to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the matter, though acceptance is far from guaranteed.
Read the full article here
