Too Old to Sue? What the WWE Ring Boys Ruling Says About Revived Claims
A federal judge let the decades-old ring boys abuse suit against WWE and the McMahons go forward, rejecting a constitutional attack on Maryland's Child Victims Act. Here is what revived claims mean for the accused.
October 20, 2026 · 3 min read
By Jocelyn C. Stewart
A federal judge in Maryland has ruled that a decades-old abuse lawsuit against WWE, its parent company TKO, and Vince and Linda McMahon can go forward. The defense argued that reviving claims this old is unconstitutional. The judge disagreed. If you think the calendar protects you from an old accusation, this ruling is worth reading.
What is alleged. As POST Wrestling and F4W's Wrestling Observer both report, seven anonymous men allege they were abused as minors in the 1980s and 1990s while working on WWF ring crews, all by former ring announcer Mel Phillips. Inside Higher Ed and POST Wrestling say the suit claims the company and the McMahons were negligent in allowing it. Phillips died in 2012. These are allegations. No court has found them true.
The response. The defendants deny the central claims, POST Wrestling reports. Inside Higher Ed notes that Linda McMahon, now U.S. Secretary of Education, has said in court filings that she did not supervise Phillips and did not know what he was doing.
The ruling. On Oct. 19, according to all three outlets, U.S. District Judge James K. Bredar held that Maryland's Child Victims Act is constitutional as applied to this case. The defense had argued that the abuse is alleged to have happened about 40 years ago and that key witnesses have died. The judge acknowledged that would make the case hard to defend, the same reports say, but found the law a rational choice for the legislature to make.
Why it matters. A statute of limitations is a deadline, not a right. In many states the legislature can extend it or erase it, even for old claims. The ruling does not decide whether anything happened. It decides that a jury may be asked.