In a surprising turn of events, the woman who had filed a temporary restraining order (TRO) against former NFL player Puka Nacua has voluntarily withdrawn her petition. The decision, announced by the accuser’s attorney, Joseph Kar, comes as the civil lawsuit against Nacua continues to move forward. The case, which began with allegations of an antisemitic remark and a physical altercation, has attracted intense media attention and legal scrutiny.
Background of the Allegations
Madison Atiabi, the woman who brought the initial legal action against Nacua, claims that the incident took place during a group outing in Los Angeles on December 31, 2025. According to Atiabi’s statements, Nacua allegedly shouted, “f all the Jews,” during dinner, an utterance she says was both hateful and threatening. Shortly after, Nacua is said to have bitten her left shoulder, leaving a circular imprint of his teeth. Atiabi provided a photograph of the injury in the civil lawsuit, which has been filed in the Los Angeles County Superior Court.
Video footage from the evening has surfaced, showing the Rams wide receiver—who was present at the event—passing out in a nearby area. In the same clip, Atiabi can be seen dancing close to Nacua’s face, an action that some observers have described as provocative. The footage, which was released by a third party, has been used by both sides to support their narratives.
Legal Developments and Strategy Shift
On Friday, Joseph Kar issued a press release stating that his client had dropped the TRO in order to concentrate solely on the civil lawsuit. Kar emphasized that the civil case remains active and that the withdrawal of the restraining order does not diminish the seriousness of Atiabi’s claims. He also criticized Nacua’s legal team for what he described as “inflammatory statements” to the press that, according to him, mischaracterized the facts of the case.
Levi McCathern, Nacua’s attorney, has taken a different stance. He argues that the allegations are part of a “shakedown” attempt, suggesting that Atiabi is demanding millions of dollars from Nacua. McCathern maintains that the bite was a minor incident, resulting in only a temporary mark, and denies that Nacua ever made an antisemitic remark. He also points to the alleged horseplay that occurred that night as context for the alleged bite.
Despite the withdrawal of the TRO, the civil lawsuit is still progressing. The court has scheduled a preliminary hearing for the next month, during which both parties will present evidence and witnesses. The outcome of that hearing could determine whether the case will proceed to trial or be settled out of court.
Implications for Both Parties
For Atiabi, the decision to drop the restraining order may appear counterintuitive, but it could be a strategic move to avoid the costs and uncertainties associated with a criminal proceeding. By focusing on the civil case, she can pursue damages for emotional distress, injury, and any alleged defamation or hate speech. The civil suit also allows her to seek a court order that could prevent Nacua from contacting her, which may provide a form of protection without the need for a TRO.
For Nacua, the withdrawal of the TRO removes an immediate legal restriction on his movements and interactions. However, the civil lawsuit still poses a significant risk, both financially and reputationally. If the court finds in Atiabi’s favor, Nacua could be liable for substantial monetary damages and may face additional civil penalties.
Both sides have faced public scrutiny. Media outlets have reported on the alleged threats against Atiabi, and law enforcement has
InfluencerBlogger
