Court rules former Raiders coach can’t be forced into arbitration with NFL

The Nevada Supreme Court ruled Monday that former Raiders coach Jon Gruden cannot be forced to participate in arbitration in his lawsuit with the NFL.

The court had previously ruled Gruden could be required to undergo arbitration because he agreed to be bound by the NFL Constitution as part of his Raiders employment agreement. The new decision comes after Gruden sought reconsideration from the high court.

Gruden sued the league and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell in 2021, arguing the leaked emails he wrote had pushed the Raiders to fire him. He sought damages for tortious interference with his contract with the Raiders, negligence and civil conspiracy.

Gruden resigned as Raiders coach after news reports about his racist, misogynist and anti-LGBTQ emails. The NFL has denied leaking the emails.

“We conclude the arbitration clause in the NFL Constitution is unconscionable and does not apply to Gruden as a former employee,” a five-justice majority wrote. “Nor, in the circumstances presented here, can the NFL Parties claim equitable estoppel to enforce the arbitration clause in Gruden’s coaching contract with the Raiders.”

Through a statement sent Monday evening, an attorney for Gruden said he’s “very pleased” with the decision.

Adam Hosmer-Henner, an attorney for the McDonald Carano firm, said the decision wasn’t just good for Gruden, but was good for “all employees facing an employer’s unfair arbitration process.”

Hosmer-Henner added the “victory further validates Coach Gruden’s reputation” and “clears the way to swiftly bringing him full justice and holding the NFL accountable.”

Lynn Bayard, an attorney with the firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, which represented the NFL in the matter, could not be reached for comment Monday evening. A message for NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy was not immediately returned.

In 2022, the NFL appealed to Nevada’s high court after a judge in Las Vegas rejected league bids to dismiss Gruden’s claim outright or to order out-of-court talks through an arbitration process that could be overseen by Goodell.

Monday’s decision appears to make way for Gruden’s lawsuit to proceed. In a text message to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Hosmer-Henner said “that would be the typical procedure.”

The Supreme Court’s decision also noted the NFL Constitution would have permitted Goodell “to arbitrate disputes about his own conduct — exactly what is at issue here.”

And, the ruling said, Gruden’s allegations about the release of his emails were outside the bounds of his contract.

A dissenting opinion was issued by Justice Kristina Pickering and Justice Elissa Cadish concurred with it. Cadish and Pickering previously ruled in the NFL’s favor on the arbitration issue, but Gruden requested reconsideration by the whole court in July 2024.

Pickering said she would have compelled arbitration.

“As a former Super Bowl champion coach and long-time media personality signing the most lucrative NFL coaching contract in history, while being represented by one of the country’s leading sports agents, Gruden was the very definition of a sophisticated party,” Pickering wrote. “Though Gruden could not negotiate the terms of the NFL Constitution, he had the ability to negotiate the contract as a whole — such as for more pay, a longer contract, added control over team decisions, or its other terms.”

Contact Noble Brigham at nbrigham@reviewjournal.com. Follow @BrighamNoble on X. Contact Bryan Horwath at bhorwath@reviewjournal.com. Follow @BryanHorwath on X.