A search firm’s assessment of Brian Flores is now public in his case against the NFL and several teams. The slide lists ongoing litigation as a possible distraction, but the judge ruled on access to the document, not on Flores’s characterization of it.
In New York on October 8, Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave unsealed a Korn Ferry slide weighing Brian Flores’s strengths and weaknesses. Her unsealing order directed the clerk to open Exhibit A, the search firm’s assessment of Flores. In the slide’s right column, the entry reads, “Ongoing litigation may be a distraction.” The 14-day objection period expired without an objection or request for more time. A page Korn Ferry asked to keep sealed now sits in the public file of Flores’s case against the NFL and six teams; the court has not decided whether the slide supports Flores’s claims.
Flores obtained the slide through a June 15 subpoena to Korn Ferry, a nonparty search firm. He attached it to his opposition to motions to dismiss and to a supplemental complaint. Judge Cave’s September 23 opinion describes it as a slide from a 2024 presentation to the Las Vegas Raiders for a head coach search. The same opinion says Korn Ferry aided the Raiders in 2025. The opinion does not reconcile those dates.
The 5 sources behind this story: 5 court records, each linked with what it shows. Free with the weekly Litigation Sentinel brief.
The document’s heading pairs Brian Flores’s name with the words “Strengths and Weaknesses.” It praises his defensive coaching, adaptability and ability to confuse offenses. Its other column criticizes his management style and quotes an unnamed executive with a team that formerly employed Flores: “He may have changed since, but he was the worst hiring decision we’ve ever made”. That is an assertion reproduced in Korn Ferry’s slide, not a finding by the court. The slide does not identify the executive or the team.
Another line describes Flores as “Polished and a good presenter despite growing up in Brownsville, Brooklyn (same as Mike Tyson).” The phrasing, the executive’s account and the litigation entry now sit together in a public exhibit. Flores’s September 1 letter, signed by David E. Gottlieb of Wigdor LLP, argued that the slide contained discriminatory and retaliatory considerations. The letter also argued that treating Flores’s involvement in this litigation as a weakness was unlawful.
Korn Ferry asked to keep the exhibit sealed. As Judge Cave recounted, the firm argued that it contained information gathered from confidential sources for a confidential search and that disclosure could harm its ability to conduct such work. Flores opposed sealing. The NFL took no position.
Free weekly intelligence for executives responsible for litigation exposure: the named decision-makers, dollar exposure, operating consequence, and next development.
Judge Cave denied the request on September 23. She found that Korn Ferry had offered no testimony or other evidence to support it. In the judge’s assessment, the exhibit disclosed more about Flores than about Korn Ferry’s search methods and revealed nothing about the Raiders beyond their use of a search firm for one hiring cycle. She also found that concern about reputational harm did not outweigh public access.
The opinion drew a boundary around that ruling. Judge Cave wrote that it was unnecessary “at this juncture” to adopt Flores’s characterization of the statements as “discriminatory or retaliatory.” She decided whether the public could see the exhibit. She did not decide whether its contents proved Flores’s claim.
The order gave the parties until October 7, a 14-day window, to object before the documents were opened. None objected or sought more time, according to Judge Cave’s October 8 order. Judge Cave pointed to media attention on the fact that the exhibit was sealed and observed that, by seeking to seal it, the firm may have inadvertently made the exhibit seem more exciting than it would turn out to be.
The Raiders were Korn Ferry’s client for the search; they are not listed as a defendant in these orders. Flores’s case proceeds against the NFL, the New York Giants, the Denver Broncos and the Houston Texans in discovery. His claims against the Miami Dolphins, Arizona Cardinals and Tennessee Titans are stayed. The distinction limits what this unsealing order says about any team: it identifies a search client and defendants, but it does not identify the executive quoted on the slide.
**Analysis:** A nonparty hiring assessment has become a public exhibit while dismissal motions remain unresolved. For employers, it shows the path: a subpoena to a search firm, then a sealing request Korn Ferry backed with no testimony or other evidence. Neither order finds the assessment accurate or unlawful.
The parties’ October 1 joint status letter says the discovery defendants’ motions to dismiss were fully briefed on August 19 and that the parties expected to begin producing documents in October. It reports a discovery conference scheduled before Judge Cave for October 29. Korn Ferry’s bid to keep the slide closed has ended. The exhibit is open.
The Executive Briefing has five questions about your reported litigation practices. Use the summary to choose an operating question to explore.
Take the Executive Briefing →Free weekly intelligence for executives responsible for litigation exposure: the named decision-makers, dollar exposure, operating consequence, and next development.