Ex-WWE employee Janel Grant sues Vince McMahon after missed hush money payments
Jan 18, 2018; Stamford, CT, USA; WWE founder and chairman Vince McMahon poses for a portrait photo. McMahon announced that the XFL will re-launch in 2020. Mandatory Credit: Craig Ambrosio/Handout Photo via USA TODAY Sports
Former WWE employee Janel Grant has filed a lawsuit against Vince McMahon over alleged missed hush money payments.
In 2022, McMahon stepped away from running WWE after a Wall Street Journal report said that the wrestling boss was being investigated by WWE for signing a $3 million non-disclosure agreement with Grant.
According to Grant’s lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut on Thursday, McMahon made a $1 million payment to her but did not make payments thereafter because he thought she had leaked information to the media.
Terms of their non-disclosure agreement, which was reviewed by Larry Brown Sports, stated that Grant was owed a payment of $500,000 on Feb. 1 of each year from 2023-2026, totaling the remaining $2 million balance.
In response to McMahon not paying according to the terms of their agreement, Grant has sued McMahon. She has also named WWE employee John Laurinaitis and the WWE as defendants in the lawsuit.
In her lawsuit, Grant graphically details the nature of her sexual relationship with McMahon and alleges that he passed her around WWE for sexual purposes. In return, Grant says she received a job at WWE, protection of that job even when the company was going through financial problems in 2020, and the promise of future promotions. She also received a BMW 430 XI, clothes, jewelry, thousands of dollars in gift cards, tickets to events, and money to cover surgery and other medical care.
Grant claims she became McMahon’s sexual toy and that he and others, including Laurinaitis, had unwanted sex with her at times, including threesomes.
Grant’s lawsuit accuses McMahon and Laurinaitis of Violation of the Trafficking Victims Prevention Act; the WWE of negligence and participating in the violation of the TVPA; civil battery against all defendants; intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress against all defendants; and declaratory relief.
