Vince McMahon and World Wrestling Entertainment filed motions on Wednesday in the Janel Grant case ahead of a June 10 arbitration hearing.
The filings were in support of moving Grant’s case, in which she accused McMahon of sexual assault and sex trafficking, to an arbiter per a non-disclosure agreement she signed.
“She does not dispute that, according to the agreement, she read and understood its terms and her attorney explained them to her, or that she signed the Agreement in exchange for payment,” said WWE in its motion supporting arbitration. “Grant does not meaningfully dispute this. Indeed, she does not address the delegation of arbitrability to the arbitrator at all, other than to ask that, if the Court “refers the question of arbitrability to an arbitrator, it should refrain from finding that the NDA or its arbitration clause are valid on their face.”
McMahon and WWE say the Speak Out Act and the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 aren’t applicable to Grant’s opposition to arbitration. The defendants say the EFAA is only applicable to disputes that had “not yet risen,” when they were signed, stating that Grant signed the agreement afterward.
McMahon attorney Jessica T. Rosenberg filed an affidavit, which included an email exchange with Grant counsel asking for all of the materials that were examined by an expert witness ahead of the arbitration hearing.
“We have reviewed your most recent filing and write to request ‘all materials ‘considered’ by Dr. Chitra Raghavan in forming the opinions reflected in her declaration,’” Rosenberg wrote. “Including, but not limited to, any notes from the purported 30 (h)ours of clinical interviews with plaintiff, results and notes associated with psychological testing performed, and the ‘approximately 81,000 texts, emails, videos, and photographs provided by Ms. Grant as well as those produced by the DOJ.’”
Grant attorney Greg Jones declined in a reply email, stating discovery is currently stayed in the case and McMahon and WWE have opposed discovery for the hearing.
“We will not be producing any materials considered by Dr. Raghavan for her declaration to the defendants at this time,” Jones replied. “As you know, defendants have opposed discovery in this case from the outset, including in the more narrow context of discovery related to the motion to compel arbitration proceedings. It is also notable that the vast majority of materials … should also be in the possession, custody and/or control of defendants. Finally, your reference to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 is inapposite and unavailing, given that discovery is currently stayed in the case.”
Raghavan testimony was part of a motion in opposition to arbitration based on Grant’s mental health when she signed the agreement. Grant recently shared FBI letters identifying her as a possible crime victim in connection with the broader case.
The arbitration hearing is scheduled for June 10 at Connecticut District Court. Brock Lesnar’s WWE future has also been linked to the lawsuit’s outcome.