For 35 years, he’s been an iconic sports commentator serving Sacramento as a play-by-play announcer for its NBA franchise, the Kings; and for a popular host on KHTK-AM 1140, a property formerly owned by CBS Radio that is today a part of the Bonneville International Corp. family.
The company fired him at the height of the George Floyd murder unrest, in June 2020, after he tweeted “All Lives Matter” and bringing unwanted attention to both himself and to KHTK. A wrongful termination suit filed in October 2021 was tossed in April 2023. Then came an amended suit, in May. Now, Bonneville’s attorneys are asking the court to dismiss the amended suit, putting Grant Napear’s legal battle to rest.
A hearing has been set for August 1 in the U.S. District Court’s Eastern District of California that will see Napear and Bonneville’s legal counsel convene as a district judge and magistrate judge meet to consider the former host’s motion to modify the court’s scheduling order and Napear’s bid to amend his complaint.
It’s all tied to a single Tweet made on the social media website by Napear on May 31, 2020.
Napear received a question on Twitter from a former Kings player: “What’s your take on [Black Lives Matter]?” Napear’s response, which came less than a week after George Floyd’s death, was that “ALL LIVES MATTER . . . EVERY SINGLE ONE!!!”
For Bonneville, this was an act of misconduct. As such, it terminated Napear after determining that the Tweet was likely to discredit KHTK’s goodwill and reputation with the Kings and the public. “The termination was consistent with Mr. Napear’s employment agreement, which allowed Bonneville to terminate Mr. Napear for any ‘conduct that might discredit the goodwill, good name, or reputation of the company,’ as determined by Bonneville in its ‘reasonable discretion,’” Bonneville said.
Napear disagreed, and in that original complaint went after Bonneville on the grounds that his termination “caused him damage.”
Now, 18 months after his October 2021 lawsuit and the dismissal by the court of each of his asserted claims, Napear is attempting to add a breach of contract claim into the picture.
Bonneville’s attorneys say no, on the grounds that the court’s scheduling order for amending the pleadings has passed. “Napear cannot show ‘good cause’ to modify the scheduling order because he has known the facts allegedly giving rise to his proposed breach of contract since the beginning of the case,” Bonneville’s legal counsel told the court. “Moreover, Mr. Napear has engaged in undue delay regarding his proposed breach of contract claim, and adding the claim now would significantly prejudice Bonneville. Mr.
Napear’s tactical decision not to plead a contract claim from the outset of this case should not be rewarded.”
Napear’s original lawsuit accused Salt Lake City-headquartered Bonneville of racial, gender, and religious discrimination under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act and retaliation in violation of California Labor Code sections 1101 and 1102.
Bonneville is represented by Tanner B. Camp and David Jordan of Foley & Lardner LLP. And, while they fight Napear regarding his attempt to include a breach of contract claim, they are also seeking to dismiss his amended claim “because he fails to allege facts sufficient to infer that Bonneville fired him because of his religion.”
A hearing on this focus of Napear’s fight is scheduled for July 18, and Bonneville made it clear to the Court that Napear’s religious discrimination claim should quickly be tossed.
“Napear attempts to salvage a subset of his claims by changing his story,” the attorneys at Foley & Lardner state. “For example, although Mr. Napear alleged in the first amended complaint that he always kept his religion to himself, he now claims that he spoke periodically about his religion with his Bonneville co-workers. Also, while he alleged in the first amended complaint that Bonneville never supported and was against the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement, he now asserts that Bonneville used Mr. Napear as a ‘sacrificial lamb’ to ‘curry favor’ with the movement. Despite the inconsistencies and contradictions
with his previous allegations, Napear’s current allegations remain deficient, and his claims
should be dismissed.”
Napear is represented by Matthew Ruggles of Ruggles Law Firm. As of midday Wednesday (6/7) neither Ruggles nor Napear responded to the motion to dismiss and opposition filed last week by Bonneville.
Napear today is the host of the If You Don’t Like That With Grant Napear podcast.
