NFL team tries to quash lawsuit by paralyzed man


The Tennessee Titans want a Nevada judge to quash a lawsuit seeking damages for a strip club employee paralyzed in a triple shooting that followed a fracas involving suspended NFL player Adam "Pacman" Jones.

A judge is scheduled on Wednesday to hear arguments by an attorney for the team who contends the Titans had nothing to do with Jones going to the Minxx Gentleman's Club on Feb. 19, and that the team doesn't have enough ties to Nevada to establish jurisdiction for the lawsuit.

It would be "unreasonable" to require the team to defend itself in Las Vegas against a case by the paralyzed man, Tommy Urbanski, and his wife, lawyer Nathaniel Hannaford argued in a brief filed in December.

Hannaford did not immediately respond Friday to messages seeking comment.

Matthew Dushoff, a lawyer who represents Urbanski, insisted Friday that Nevada courts have jurisdiction because the Titans sell tickets and merchandise in every state, and Jones is employed by the Titans.

Jones would not have been invited to the club for a party the weekend of the NBA All-Star game if he was not on the team, Dushoff argued in a Dec. 27 court filing.

The lawsuit was filed Oct. 19 in Clark County District Court. It seeks unspecified damages from Jones, the NFL, the Titans and the owners of Harlem Knights, a Houston strip club that rented the Las Vegas club for the Feb. 19 party.

Jones' lawyer, Robert Langford, has denied Jones had any responsibility for Urbanski's injuries.

NFL lawyers have not sought to quash the lawsuit. But NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said league officials believe there is no legal basis for Urbanski's claim against the league.

Jones, 24, pleaded no contest Dec. 6 to a reduced charge of conspiracy to commit disorderly conduct, a gross misdemeanor, in the brawl inside the club.

No one has been charged in the shooting, but police called Jones an "inciter" of the fighting inside. Prosecutors have said they hope Jones can provide information leading to the arrest of the gunman.

 

Comment section guidelines

The below comment section contains thoughts and opinions from users that in no way represent the views of the Las Vegas Review-Journal or Stephens Media LLC. This public platform is intended to provide a forum for users of reviewjournal.com to share ideas, express thoughtful opinions and carry the conversation beyond the article. Users must follow the guidelines under our Commenting Policy and are encouraged to use the moderation tools to help maintain civility and keep discussions on topic.