Janel Grant just made a major legal move in her lawsuit— and it could decide whether her case plays out in public or behind closed doors.
On April 1, 2026, Grant filed a memorandum pushing back against efforts by WWE and Vince McMahon to send the case to private arbitration. Instead, her legal team is arguing that the NDA she signed shouldn’t hold up — and shouldn’t stop her from taking the fight to open court. This isn’t just a procedural step. It’s a direct challenge to one of the key defenses being used to keep the case out of public view.
In the filing, Grant’s lawyers lay out details from early 2019, when she says she was in contact with McMahon while pursuing a job opportunity with WWE. According to the document, those interactions involved ongoing discussions about employment — but also included statements that are now being used to question how issues were handled internally.
One specific claim stands out, with Janel Grant alleging that Vince McMahon referenced his longtime attorney, Jerry McDevitt, while discussing how problems get dealt with.
“Around this time, Vince mentioned that he had an attorney, Jerry McDevitt, on speed dial who was the best at making problems, including people who become problems, go away.”
This is presented as part of a larger timeline in the filing, which Grant’s legal team says shows how the relationship evolved during the hiring process — something they argue is relevant when evaluating whether the NDA should be enforced. The timing here matters. Just weeks after publicly criticizing NDAs as tools that can hide workplace issues, Grant is now actively trying to stop one from limiting her own case.
If the court agrees with her argument, the case stays in public view — meaning more filings, more details, and more scrutiny. If not, it could move into private arbitration, where much of the process would stay out of the spotlight. Either way, this latest move raises the stakes — and puts the NDA issue front and center in a case that’s already drawing serious attention.
Should Janel Grant be allowed to take this case to public court — or should the NDA still apply? Let us know what you think.