Two rulings made by a federal judge in the legal battle between Dallas Cowboys’ owner Jerry Jones and a woman who says he is her father were unsealed Thursday. One of the decisions says the 1998 settlement agreement the woman’s mother entered on her behalf is not a violation of Texas public policy.
The billionaire is set to face the woman, 27-year-old Alexandra Davis and her mother, Cynthia Davis, in less than two weeks for a jury trial in a U.S. district court in Texarkana. District Judge Robert W. Schroeder III is presiding.
The jury will hear Jones’ counterclaim, which stems from Alexandra Davis suing him for defamation in March 2023. He is accusing the women of breaching an agreement they entered in 1998 saying they must keep the settlement details confidential and could not sue — or support any suit — to establish paternity, in exchange for millions of dollars for Alexandra Davis from “early childhood through adulthood.”
Alexandra Davis argued a settlement prohibiting a child from establishing a paternity is a violation of Texas public policy that “protects the best interests of children and states that parents ‘share in the rights and duties of raising a child.’”
Jones’ attorneys argued Texas courts allow parents to waive and release statutory and constitutional rights on behalf of their children, citing family code.
Schroeder ruled the settlement is valid and does not go against public policy, adding that “Texas law is clear” that parents or legal guardians can enter legal agreements on their child’s behalf. He also wrote in the ruling that Alexandra Davis hadn’t shown her interests were “potentially adverse” to her mother’s before turning 18.
“It’s really shocking,” Alexandra Davis’ attorney Jay Gray told The Dallas Morning News on Thursday. “I respectfully disagree with the ruling.”
Gray said the judge’s decision allows for a potential father to bind a child from ever revealing their identity, which could have larger ramifications beyond this case. He said he intends to appeal the ruling but would not be able to do so until after a verdict in the trial.
“I can’t in good conscience let this ruling stand without trying to fight it,” he said. “I can’t let my legacy be allowing a rich father to prevent their child from being able to establish paternity.”
Jones’ attorney Chip Babcock told The News he wasn’t too surprised by the ruling.
“We think it supported the position we have been taking all along and the judge pointed out their [the defendants’] position is not supported by any case law around the country,” he said, adding that they’re prepared to move forward with the trial.
The Davises have also argued the settlement is not a valid contract and said Jones couldn’t recall details of the contract, hadn’t seen it personally until a few years ago and “‘hid’ behind attorney-client privilege” when a lawyer entered it on his behalf, according to the ruling.
Schroeder ruled that the Davises can “explore inconsistencies” about Jones’ knowledge on certain details of the agreement, “but his inability to recall certain details about a contract by his agent more than two decades ago does not invalidate the contract.”
“All parties — Jones, through [an agent], and Cynthia Davis, on behalf of herself and her daughter Alexandra Davis — performed their duties under the settlement agreement for more than 20 years until the alleged breach occurred, indicating their intent to be bound by the terms of the settlement agreement,” the judge wrote. “Accordingly, the contract is valid and enforceable as to as least Jones, Cynthia Davis and Alexandra Davis before she reached the age of majority.”
The other unsealed ruling said the parties can present evidence and arguments during the trial in relation to the “bad faith or intentional spoilation of text messages” from the Davises’ devices.
In previous filings Jones alleged the Davises may have destroyed evidence, including deleting texts that discussed the settlement agreement with third parties.
Schroeder ruled that although there is “beyond reasonable dispute” the Davises ruined evidence, there’s also evidence they may not have had “bad faith or intention to destroy evidence.”
A separate paternity case filed in March 2022 is ongoing in Dallas County, in which a judge ruled in February that Jones would have to take a DNA test to prove whether he is Davis’ biological father and to establish paternity. Jones has repeatedly denied he is Alexandra Davis’ father.
