Janel Grant filed a reply brief on Friday, pushing back against arguments by defendants Vince McMahon, WWE, and John Laurinaitis to block her amended complaint, which adds to her allegations of sexual abuse and trafficking which the defendants deny.
The latest filing from Grant, who was a WWE employee at the time of the alleged abuse, argues that the federal district court in Connecticut should allow the expanded version of her lawsuit to be the one litigated. Developments that have emerged since her original filing in January 2024, should be considered, she says. That includes the Securities and Exchange Commission’s findings that McMahon engaged in — what Grant characterizes as — a scheme to conceal misconduct.
McMahon and WWE each filed on February 21 their oppositions to Grant’s motion to amend her complaint. Filings from Laurinaitis indicate he’s in agreement with McMahon. The defendants argued that Grant is misusing the court to generate publicity. In Friday’s filing, Grant rejected their claims, asserting that she initially withheld certain details — including the names of high-ranking WWE executives, including company President Nick Khan, who she alleges enabled McMahon — out of concern for an active criminal investigation into McMahon by the federal prosecutors. Executives other than McMahon and Laurinaitis are not alleged to have directly participated in abuse. Now that the stay that was imposed from June to December 2024 has ended, Grant’s attorneys say she is entitled to present a fuller picture of the alleged abuse, including identifying individuals who she says facilitated it.
“While certain facts were available at the time the original complaint was filed, Ms. Grant tried to exercise caution with respect to certain subjects to ensure that her civil suit would not frustrate the DOJ’s efforts,” wrote Grant’s attorneys, led by Ann Callis.
McMahon’s legal team denies Grant’s allegations against him and has stated that prosecutors’ criminal investigation into his conduct has ended without charges. A decision from federal appeals court judges last month seemed to undermine that notion about the status of the investigation when that court referred to the investigation as “ongoing”. One of McMahon’s attorneys last month stated the investigation is finished, “with no ambiguity”. When we asked McMahon’s representatives last month if they had written documentation showing that the criminal investigation had concluded, they didn’t respond.
One of the significant disputes in Grant’s filing is the relevance of the SEC’s findings against McMahon. WWE and McMahon’s attorneys argue that the SEC’s settlement and fines levied this past January were about financial disclosure violations, not the allegations of coercion and sexual abuse at the center of Grant’s case. The defendants contend that the regulatory action has no bearing on whether Grant was forced into signing a nondisclosure agreement under duress. Grant’s legal team disagrees, asserting that the SEC’s order referenced the NDA at issue in her lawsuit as well as McMahon’s efforts to conceal settlements with at least one other woman.
“These facts are material to this Court’s assessment of whether the illegal NDA agreement can be enforced,” Grant’s attorney wrote. “Defendants hope to obscure these facts, or at least avoid having to address them while operating under the Amended Complaint, while using the arbitration clause contained in that illegal agreement as both a sword and shield in this case.”
The defendants have so far strongly pushed to move Grant’s case into private arbitration, citing the relevant clause in the NDA that she signed and that McMahon signed on behalf of both himself and WWE in January 2022.
Friday’s filing also raises information from Grant’s related case in state court in Connecticut involving Dr. Carlon Colker and his clinic Peak Wellness, the medical facility that Grant says McMahon directed her to go to for treatments she alleges she did not fully understand. Grant’s attorneys stated that Colker’s legal team has admitted withholding her medical records, a claim they argue supports her allegations that McMahon controlled multiple aspects of her life, including her medical treatment. Grant’s petition against Colker for records related to her treatment is still ongoing in Connecticut Superior Court.
Callis provided the following statement shortly after this article was published:
“Ms. Grant is grateful and empowered by the support she has received from the community and looks forward to holding Vince McMahon, John Laurinaitis, and WWE accountable for facilitating the sex trafficking and abuse she endured at the company.”
Grant’s lawyers additionally argue that her updated complaint provides greater detail on the alleged coercion she endured, which the court should hear, stating that the amendments serve “to explain the extreme and prolonged abuse Plaintiff was withstanding with greater particularity. The coercion surrounding the agreement and arbitration clause is undeniably relevant to this Court’s assessment of Defendants’” intention to move the case to arbitration.
Among other arguments, McMahon and WWE have insisted that the arbitration clause in the NDA is enforceable due to Grant’s acceptance of the initial $1 million payment, the length of time — two years — she waited between signing the NDA and filing her lawsuit.
Judge Sarah F. Russell will decide whether to allow Grant’s updated 94-page complaint to formally become part of the case or whether to deny her motion and move forward with her original 67-page complaint, filed in January 2024.
Brandon Thurston has written about wrestling business since 2015. He operates and owns Wrestlenomics.