Skip navigation
Sign up to follow your favorites on all your devices.
Sign up

Judge grants Michael Irvin’s request for expedited discovery against Marriott

Mike Florio and Myles Simmons take a deep dive into the litigation process between Michael Irvin and Marriott, given the company has refused to provide surveillance video critical to the case.

Marriott wants the $100 million lawsuit filed against it by Hall of Fame receiver Michael Irvin to be dismissed. Even if that effort eventually succeeds, Marriott will have to cough up some information first.

Via Michael Gehlken of the Dallas Morning News, Judge Amos Mazzant II granted Irvin’s request for discovery against Marriott.

This means that Marriott must surrender surveillance video and other requested materials, such as internal reports, more quickly than the rules otherwise would allow.

The evidence must be given to Irvin by Tuesday, March 7, at 5:00 p.m. CT. The judge authorized Marriott to redact the name of the employee who complained about him.

In his lawsuit, Irvin claims that Marriott employees woke him up, escorted him from the hotel grounds, and informed NFL Network of the incident.

“Michael and I are pleased with the ruling, and we thank the Court for ruling so quickly and equitably,” attorney Levi McCathern told Gehlken. “We look forward to receiving the information that we believe will prove that Michael was engaged in no wrongdoing.”

In a recent filing, Marriott said that Irvin made “harassing and inappropriate comments” to the unnamed employee. That could make it more difficult to determine whether Irvin did or didn’t do what he’s accused of doing based only on the video surveillance.

Other documents and evidence become important to the question of whether the story shifted from an allegation of physical misconduct to something verbal in nature after, for example, it was realized that the video shows nothing improper.

Marriott seeks dismissal on the basis that it doesn’t actually own the hotel at which the incident occurred. Marriott argues that it merely licenses its name to the property.