Attorneys Seek Info on Alleged Dan Snyder ‘Enemy List’ in Letter to NFL

NEW YORK — A year ago, two former Washington Commanders employees delivered a letter to owners at the NFL’s fall meeting that sought transparency in the league’s investigation of the team.

Their attorneys sent a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell as this year’s owners meeting that questioned whether the league aided Commanders owner Dan Snyder in creating an “enemies list” — and closed the letter with a threat of a lawsuit.

An NFL spokesperson said in a statement to Front Office Sports that the allegation made in the letter by attorneys Lisa Banks and Debra Katz “is false.”

“Ms. Wilkinson and her firm kept their pledge to the witnesses and did not share their identities with the Commissioner or League staff other than the limited number of participants who were willing to be identified,” the NFL spokesperson said.

ESPN reported last week that an unnamed former team executive told the outlet the NFL’s first outside investigation — led by former assistant U.S. Attorney Beth Wilkinson — was used as a roadmap for Snyder’s legal team to gain info on critics.

In the letter, Banks and Katz requested to meet with Goodell to determine “whether there are facts to demonstrate that this ‘tip sheet’ allegation is unfounded.

“If you ignore our request, as you have with our past requests to talk to you directly, we will assume that the reporting by [ESPN] is true and we will move forward with formal legal action on behalf of our clients,” the letter stated.

The Commanders issued the following statement:

“Neither the Team nor Mr. Snyder was ever advised by the NFL, Ms. Wilkinson, or anyone else, about the progress of the investigation, or who had been interviewed in connection with it — either during the investigation or afterwards.  Even now, the team and Mr. Snyder have not received any information from the NFL or Ms. Wilkinson on these matters.  ESPN was advised of this fact before they ran their story last week, but proceeded to go forward with the story, based on their discussions with “unnamed sources.” The story was false last week, and it is false today.”