Miami Beach NFL agent Drew Rosenhaus is at the receiving end of a lawsuit, and it’s not pretty.
One of only a few woman NFL agents has filed against the high-profile Rosenhaus and his brother Jason in a federal court in Maryland.
And the action appears to have as much to do about breaking the NFL agency’s good old boys network as sour grapes over a disloyal client.
The woman, Maryland lawyer Edith Lawson-Jackson, accuses the brothers of “predatory” practices and dangling money in front of Denver Broncos linebacker Shaquil Barrett to entice him to leave her and join Rosenhaus Sports.
One of an estimated 50 women among 900 or so NFL agents, Jackson also wants to reverse a decision by the NFL Players Association that Rosenhaus acted properly in accepting Barrett into his stable.
She claims mainly that Rosenhaus and the lawyer used by the NFLPA’s arbitration were in cahoots.
Linebacker Barrett, the lawsuit claims, signed on with Jackson in December 2013 as he left Colorado State University. He was an undrafted free agent. Still, the lawyer managed to negotiate a three-year, $1.53 million contract with the Broncos.
Two years later, Jackson found out Barrett, who’s expecting a much richer new deal, was considering switching agents and going with the Rosenhauses.
And eventually, Super Bowl 50 hero Barrett did switch.
Jackson now claims Rosenhaus initiated the contacts with the player, which is against NFLPA rules. Rosenhaus, according to the lawsuit, pestered Barrett and advanced him $75,000 to entice him — a no-no in the highly regulated league.
Rosenhaus said in the arbitration proceedings he did nothing wrong.
For the arbitration, according to the court papers, the NFLPA appointed Roger Kaplan, who presided over similar cases for 35 years.
And over the summer, Kaplan decided Jackson had not proved any wrongdoing from Rosenhaus’ part and that she lost her client fair and square.
With Jackson now taking the controversy to a federal court, she claims Kaplan failed to reveal that he had non-NFL business with Rosenhaus and couldn’t be impartial.
What’s more, Jackson claims Kaplan failed to force Barrett to testify and admit into evidence things like phone bills and bank statements likely to show when Rosenhaus first contacted Barrett, and prove he did indeed advance him money.
Neither Jackson nor Rosenhaus returned calls and emails for comment. Records show Rosenhaus has yet to be served the Christmas week filing.