Much of what was stated in legal filings on Wednesday in the Joe Gibbs Racing vs. Chris Gabehart and Spire Motorsports lawsuit and countersuit was a rehash of previous allegations.
However, what was not a rehash, was JGR deciding to withdraw one of the allegations it made in an amended complaint. In the second amended complaint, the team made the following claim:
Advertisement
“A Spire employee has informed a JGR employee that Gabehart is in charge of and/or significantly participating in Spire’s competition strategy and decisions. Employees were instructed not to discuss the fact Gabehart is leading and/or participating in Spire’s competition and strategy decision making process outside of Spire. There is no legal justification for advising its employees to conceal the true nature of Gabehart’s services. Spire is aware that Gabehart leading and/or participating in Spire’s competition strategy and decision-making violates his noncompete obligations set forth in the Agreement.”
This was one of the more significant claims Joe Gibbs Racing has made since litigation began in February. However, Gibbs has now asked the court to strike this allegation from the record and that motion has been granted.
Specifically, JGR stated the following on the matter in a Wednesday filing:
Advertisement
“In discovery Spire Motorsports II, LLC (“Spire”) requested information supporting the allegations contained in paragraph 129 of the Second Amended Complaint. GR responded to Spire’s request and concedes that it does not possess nonprivileged information sufficient to support the allegations contained in paragraph 129 of the Second Amended Complaint.”
The caveat here is that JGR says they do not have non-privileged information, but that’s a moot point as the plaintiffs cannot use information protected by attorney-client privilege.
For proper context, Gabehart’s attorneys have issued allegations that JGR has accessed and attempted to use privileged information within the legal process.
Advertisement
“During the course of the examination, JGR’s forensic examiner improperly disclosed dozens of Mr. Gabehart’s privileged attorney-client communications—emails between Mr. Gabehart and his counsel—directly to JGR’s counsel. JGR’s forensic examiner’s unauthorized access and disclosure occurred at a time when JGR’s counsel was not yet entitled to see any of the content from Mr. Gabehart’s personal accounts and devices—let alone his privileged and confidential communications with his lawyers. This serious breach of the April 22 Protocol and violation of the attorney-client privilege has forced Mr. Gabehart to incur substantial additional attorneys’ fees.”
Read Also:
Spire and Chris Gabehart countersue Joe Gibbs Racing
Advertisement
Joe Gibbs Racing adds to lawsuit against Chris Gabehart, Spire
Joe Gibbs Racing, Chris Gabehart, Spire agree to terms on deleted text message retrieval
A rehash of defense
Again, this has been previously argued but given that Joe Gibbs Racing filed a motion to dismiss the countersuit filed by both defendants, it forced both Spire and Gabehart to echo arguments it has previously made it court and within previous filings.
Gabehart maintains that Joe Gibbs Racing unjustly and illegally withheld his wages and manufactured a reason to terminate their employment agreement before issuing due payment and bonuses.
Advertisement
“Mr. Gabehart properly exercised his contractual rights under Section 6 of the Agreement when his job duties diverged materially from what he was promised. Rather than honor those rights, JGR stopped paying him, subjected him to an invasive forensic examination, and—after that examination confirmed what Mr. Gabehart had been telling JGR—filed this lawsuit and sent a ‘for cause’ termination letter citing the very conduct the examination had exonerated. JGR’s internal records confirm the charade: its own Termination Payroll Notice lists the termination reason as ‘Voluntary Resignation,’ and Coach Gibbs himself publicly stated that he and Mr. Gabehart ‘just decided to go our separate ways.’
Both Spire and Gabehart referenced the departure of JGR’s Chief Operating Officer Michael Guttilla to become President of Legacy Motor Club without any retaliation.
“JGR did not file suit. JGR did not seek injunctive relief. JGR did not demand forensic examinations. Yet JGR seeks to prevent Mr. Gabehart from working for Spire, a Chevrolet-aligned team that does not share the same manufacturer relationship. This double standard is not the protection of legitimate business interests—it is retaliation.”
Advertisement
Gabehart is seeking remedies over breach of contract, violations of the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act.
Read Also:
Jeff Dickerson replies to all things Gibbs, Gabehart in legal filing
Spire accuses Gibbs of ‘newfound fantasies’ and hypotheticals; Dickerson calls accusations ‘preposterous’
Spire and co-owner Jeff Dickerson have accused Joe Gibbs Racing of acting in bad faith. They have effectively called the litigation an act of petulance.
Advertisement
From the Spire response to JGR’s motion to dismiss:
“When talent, sponsors, and victories flow in JGR’s direction, JGR has done no wrong. But when talent, sponsors, and victories flow anywhere else, JGR sues and complains. JGR’s effort to dismiss Spire’s counterclaims is emblematic of this mindset.”
In a declaration, Dickerson referenced JGR hiring longtime NASCAR Cup Series car chief Robert ‘Cheddar’ Smith in April of 2025. Smith was under contract with Spire but was released so he could join JGR to serve in that capacity with the No. 54 car and driver Ty Gibbs — the grandson of team owner Coach Joe Gibbs.
Advertisement
Dickerson said he proposed a trade with JGR over what he considered a player to be named later type of agreement. He found out that JGR had already been in contact with Smith over future employment so this arrangement could have been mutually beneficial.
Dickerson said Spire targeted Tyler Allen, crew chief of the No. 54, which JGR denied a contract release. Spire also requested, if not a completed de facto personnel trade, that JGR simply pay $100,000 instead. That was not paid.
As a result, Spire has filed a countersuit against JGR for unjust enrichment. It made the following comments in Wednesday’s filing:
Advertisement
“Spire asserts three counterclaims arising from these facts. Counterclaims 67–89 alleges an enforceable oral contract that Spire fully performed by releasing Smith, and that JGR materially breached by refusing to release a comparable employee or pay $100,000. Counterclaims 68–71 pleaded in the alternative, alleges the same bargain arose as an implied-in-fact contract from the parties’ words, conduct, and course of dealing. Counterclaims 75–80 alleges JGR was unjustly enriched by accepting and retaining the benefit of Smith’s release without compensating Spire.”
Or more bluntly from Spire’s introduction:
“Recognizing that Cheddar’s non-compete with Spire prohibited him from coming to rescue Ty Gibbs’ struggling No. 54 car, JGR cut a deal with Spire. By its terms, Spire agreed to forgo its contractual rights as to Cheddar in exchange for its pick of a willing competition-level employee from JGR during the 2025 season (or a payment of $100,000). Spire upheld its end of the bargain. JGR did not. Now that Spire asks for some accountability, JGR moves to dismiss by ignoring Spire’s well-pled allegations.”
To read more Motorsport.com articles visit our website.
Read the full article here