SEARCH
                 


NBC's lawyers file papers asking court to dismiss Jeremy Roenick's lawsuit

PUBLICATION
TJ Tucker
October 26, 2020  (3:25 PM)
SHARE THIS STORY

Lawyers for NBC Sports are flat out refuting Jeremy Roenick's claim that he was fired from his analyst job with the network because he is a "straight, white male" and that it had anything to do with his political leanings. The attorneys for NBC filed the papers earlier this month but they are just coming to light now after being posted to Twitter by TSN's Rick Westhead. The documents request that the lawsuit be thrown out of court.

"This is a straightforward contract dispute that Roenick, an on-air hockey analyst, attempts to portray as a discrimination action," state the court papers from NBC's lawyers. "In his complaint, Roenick admits that: (1) the dispute is governed by a valid, written employment agreement; (2) the agreement contains a "morals clause"; (3) Roenick made comments about his NBCU co-workers on a podcast which he recognizes were "insensitive" and "definitely went too far" that resulted in the termination of his employment."

Roenick was first suspended and then fired from NHL of NBC after going on the “Spittin' Chiclets” podcast on Barstool Sports and joking about having a threesome with his wife and Kathryn Tappen, an NBC coworker. Roenick also claimed his outspoken support of U.S. President Donald Trump in 2016 hurt his cause.

“I'm swimming with my wife and Kathryn, and they've got their bikinis on, and they look f***in' smokin',” he said on the podcast in December of 2019. “Ass and boobs everywhere. It's great.”

NBC's lawyers in their court documents essentially claims Roenick's contract with the morals clause should be enough to have his lawsuit thrown out of court.

"Roenick's discrimination and hostile work environment claims, in which he alleges that he was a victim of discrimination...because he is a heterosexual male, are factually unsupported and highly implausible as pled," state the documents."

"Roenick's discrimination claims are particularly implausible in light of the clear admission in the Complaint that he engaged in the conduct for which his employment was terminated," they continued."

"Moreover, Roenick fails to support his implausible allegation that he was subjected to a hostile work environment based on his gender and sexual orientation with even a single instance of harassment, let alone harassment based on a protected characteristic."

There's no word on when the court will decide whether to toss the lawsuit or let it proceed.