California court rules Rams' arbitration clause unenforceable
Yahoo Sports • 1 min read • Latest: Aug 13, 2026, 3:33 AM
Last updated Aug 13, 2026

On August 12, 2026, the Superior Court of California declared an arbitration clause used by the Los Angeles Rams as unconscionable and unenforceable. The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by Brittany Todd, who alleged her termination was linked to complaints about supervisors consuming alcohol and abusive behavior at work. The Rams had attempted to compel arbitration, but the court rejected the motion, highlighting the inherent bias of using an NFL-employed arbitrator. This marks the third judicial decision in recent months challenging the NFL's arbitration practices and opens the door for Todd's case to proceed in court.
- •Court invalidates Rams' arbitration clause on August 12, 2026.
- •Brittany Todd filed a lawsuit following her termination.
- •Rams' arbitration agreement was deemed biased and unenforceable.
- •This case is significant amid multiple recent court rulings against NFL arbitration.
- •Todd's legal team expresses satisfaction with the ruling.
- 3:33 AMYahoo Sports — California court invalidates Rams' arbitration clause as unconscionable
"The NFL's in-house arbitration procedure continues to crumble.
Sources
External linksOriginal reporting and copyright belong to the linked sources. SportsNewsReport.com aggregates and links — it does not republish full articles.
Related Stories
Last 14 days
NFL•Oct 21, 2026, 11:13 PMWhy NFL has 'no concern' about Joe Buck, Troy Aikman ESPN contract drama
NFL•Oct 21, 2026, 8:48 PMFantasy Football Rankings: Hayden Winks' RB Blueprint for Week 7
NFL•Oct 21, 2026, 8:21 PM49ers Free Up Roster Spot for Dre Greenlaw’s Return From Suspension
NFL•Oct 21, 2026, 8:09 PMWhat Cam Ward said about Jordan Elliott, Titans players response
NFL•Oct 21, 2026, 8:08 PMNo Nick Bosa for the 49ers; Kyle Shanahan is hopeful he returns on Thursday
NFL•Oct 21, 2026, 7:58 PMCommanders announce change to coaching staff
