Los Angeles Rams breakout wide receiver Puka Nacua is in full damage-control mode after a Los Angeles woman filed court papers accusing him of an antisemitic rant and a violent bite attack during a New Year’s Eve outing. The 24-year-old rookie record-setter calls the accusations fiction, and his attorneys say the only thing that actually bled that night was an attempt to squeeze millions out of the rising NFL star.
What the Woman Told the Court
According to an application for a temporary restraining order, the woman says she joined a group of friends for dinner in Century City on 31 December 202 to ring in 2025. She claims that during the meal Nacua blurted out, “F all the Jews,” shocking the table. She also alleges that the evening spiraled from there.
After leaving the restaurant, the group piled into a Sprinter van. The woman says Nacua became “touchy-feeley,” then suddenly “dropped his head into her girlfriend’s lap and crotch area” before biting the friend’s thumb hard enough to make her scream. Moments later, she claims, he turned on her, bit her left shoulder, and “broke the skin, leaving a circular imprint of his teeth.” She attached a photograph of the purported injury to the filing.
The woman says she went to the LAPD the next day and filed an incident report. She then sought a restraining order, arguing she feared further harassment.
Mediation, TMZ Threats, and a Denial
Fast-forward to March 2026. Attorneys for both sides, plus a crisis-public-relations team, met for a private mediation. The woman claims that Nacua’s camp warned that if she pursued the matter, they would “contact TMZ and other press outlets and disseminate false, inaccurate, and/or deliberately exaggerated statements” about her.
That mediation clearly failed. Days later the story surfaced online, and Nacua’s lead counsel, Dallas-based attorney Levi McCathern, went on the offensive. “This is a textbook shakedown,” McCathern told reporters. “She has demanded millions of dollars or threatened to ruin Puka’s reputation.”
McCathern does not deny that Nacua was in the van or that some “horseplay” occurred. He insists, however, that any bite left “nothing more than a temporary mark” and that the alleged antisemitic comment “never happened.” The lawyer says he has taken statements from multiple sober dinner guests who swear they never heard the slur.
How the Court Responded
A Los Angeles Superior Court judge reviewed the woman’s request for a temporary restraining of order and declined to issue it, citing insufficient evidence of immediate danger. That denial does not decide the underlying facts; it simply means the court saw no legally urgent need for a stay-away order at this stage.
Both sides now appear headed for a civil showdown unless a settlement is reached. Criminal charges have not been filed, though the LAPD continues to list the incident as “under investigation.”
Why This Matters Beyond the Headlines
Regardless of how the case plays out, the allegations land at a moment when the NFL is under intense scrutiny over player behavior and social responsibility. The league already has faced criticism for its handling of past off-field incidents, and Commissioner Roger Goodell has pledged swifter investigations under the league’s personal-conduct policy.
Nacua, a fifth-round draft pick out of BYU, shattered rookie receiving records in 2024 and is viewed as one of the Rams’ cornerstones on offense. Any prolonged legal fight risks endorsement deals, community goodwill, and potential discipline from the league even before facts are legally established.
Key Points in Dispute
- The alleged slur: Woman says Nacua used an antisemitic epithet at dinner; lawyer says multiple witnesses “never heard it.”
- The alleged bite: Woman claims skin-breaking bite to her shoulder; defense calls it “minor horseplay” with no long-term injury.
- Financial demand: Attorneys for Nacua contend the woman asked for “millions,” characterizing the lawsuit as a money grab.
- Evidence so far: One photograph of a bruise, an LAPD incident report, but no medical records released publicly.
- Court action: A judge refused to grant a temporary restraining order, citing lack of evidence of immediate danger.
What’s Next for Nacua and the Rams
The Rams issued a terse statement: “We are aware of the matter and gather facts. We will have no further comment at this time.” The NFL has not publicly placed Nacua on any exempt list, so he remains eligible for off-season workouts and pre-season preparations.
Legal analysts say the next milestone will be discovery—where both sides exchange evidence and take depositions. If Nacua’s camp can produce sworn statements from dinner guests plus video from the restaurant or the van, the accuser’s narrative could weaken
InfluencerBlogger
