McCann's Legal Roadmap

raduray · May 12, 2015

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/12/deflategate-tom-brady-new-england-patriots-legal-options

BTTA · May 12, 2015

The title shows that the article is biased. This isn't about fighting punishments. This is about getting compensation for damage done to his (marketing) name, and it is about taking power away from Goodel permanently.

Ivan · May 12, 2015

One thing that no one is taking about is that from here on out it's the Patriots and Brady who are on the offensive. The Wells Report was the league office wad, and they spent it. From now on the narrative will be the attack on that report, and in a situation like this you always want to be on offense. Wells has provided Brady's counsel with an abundance of material for them to shred.

Jlaff · May 12, 2015

1. Per NFL constitution, team punishments are “final, conclusive and unappealable.”

As noted earlier, the Patriots are a franchise in a league and are contractually bound to follow the NFL’s constitution and other legal documents. If Kraft asks Goodell to reconsider the team’s punishment and Goodell doesn’t change it, the punishment will be final.

2. Per NFL Constitution, the NFL is authorized to punish Patriots as the league sees fit.

Article 8.13 of the NFL’s Constitution makes clear the league is not limited to levying a $25,000 fine on the Patriots. The NFL can fine teams and take away draft picks if a team violates rules that “affect the competitive aspects of the game.” There are no stated limitations on what types of draft picks, or how many draft picks, can be taken away from a team. The NFL has added grounds to punish the Patriots due to Vincent’s assertion that Patriots employees, including Brady, were uncooperative and “not fully candid.”

What is implied (in my view) in all of this, is that for a punishment to be issued, there must also be some blameworthy conduct. Interpreting this small bit of information here, it does not give the league permission to punish arbitrarily where no blameworthy conduct exists. There are explicit and implicit terms in a contract.

One response to people claiming Kraft has no recourse against the league.

Froob · May 12, 2015

So...are the draft picks unlikely to come back or do we hope a new commisner recides the punishment?

raduray · May 12, 2015

Froob said:
So...are the draft picks unlikely to come back or do we hope a new commisner recides the punishment?

I think the only way the draft picks are restored is if Brady so thoroughly destroy NFL/Wells that they will have no recourse in the eyes of public opinion but to do so.

reflexblue · May 12, 2015

This sounds like bad news for us who wanted Kraft to go after goodell. Kraft could try to sue but the courts would say he was bound by the contract, and other the case. When these owners put this structure in place they didn't take into account a commissioner that could that could use the office like goodell has. To me he abuses his power.

FrodoBagginz · May 12, 2015

raduray said:
I think the only way the draft picks are restored is if Brady so thoroughly destroy NFL/Wells that they will have no recourse in the eyes of public opinion but to do so.

We've already lost the draft picks/fine reversal if we need the public opinion on our side.

Big-T · May 12, 2015

reflexblue said:
This sounds like bad news for us who wanted Kraft to go after goodell. Kraft could try to sue but the courts would say he was bound by the contract, and other the case. When these owners put this structure in place they didn't take into account a commissioner that could that could use the office like goodell has. To me he abuses his power.

I'm sure he could still sue for a breach of the antitrust exemption, other wise it would be pointless having it if there's no way to punish the league for flagrantly breaking it.

Jlaff · May 12, 2015

reflexblue said:
This sounds like bad news for us who wanted Kraft to go after goodell. Kraft could try to sue but the courts would say he was bound by the contract, and other the case. When these owners put this structure in place they didn't take into account a commissioner that could that could use the office like goodell has. To me he abuses his power.

That's just it, the structure in place does not account for complete abuse of power (unless of course, somewhere else in that constitution it does). Therefore, as I was trying to say, it is not applicable to this situation and Kraft is likewise not limited by it.

Consider that McCann may or may not actually think something took place that warrants any sort of punishment. If there was no wrong-doing whatsoever, I believe this changes Kraft's options dramatically.

raduray · May 12, 2015

FrodoBagginz said:
We've already lost the draft picks/fine reversal if we need the public opinion on our side.

Actually, there might be another way. If Brady sues the NFL for $250M for defamation and is on the verge of winning, NFL might be induced to remove the team sanctions as part of a settlement

Jlaff · May 12, 2015

2. Per NFL Constitution, the NFL is authorized to punish Patriots as the league sees fit.

Article 8.13 of the NFL’s Constitution makes clear the league is not limited to levying a $25,000 fine on the Patriots. The NFL can fine teams and take away draft picks if a team violates rules that “affect the competitive aspects of the game.” There are no stated limitations on what types of draft picks, or how many draft picks, can be taken away from a team. The NFL has added grounds to punish the Patriots due to Vincent’s assertion that Patriots employees, including Brady, were uncooperative and “not fully candid.”

Maybe what I put in bold will explain it better (and remember, this is McCann's interpretation, so it may be more nuanced than this). That does not read "if a team violates rules, or if the Commissioner just feels like making things up"

supafly · May 13, 2015

Jlaff said:
Maybe what I put in bold will explain it better (and remember, this is McCann's interpretation, so it may be more nuanced than this). That does not read "if a team violates rules, or if the Commissioner just feels like making things up"

How are you ever going to prove that they simply made things up, though? Goodell is simply going to claim that he hired an independent investigator with an impeccable reputation, who was experienced in handling NFL affairs. He's then going to claim that the independent investigation produced significant evidence, which Wells pointed out today via his conference call/presser.

Jlaff · May 13, 2015

I don't know for sure, but they might not even need to go that far, just prove that it clearly doesn't meet the balance of probabilities standard of the NFL. The only thing the NFL has to rely on to prove their point, so far as I can tell, are their own flawed inferences concerning text messages.

PATS16N0 · May 13, 2015

The **** report concludes itself that the Patriots organization is innocent in the matter.
Then turning around and giving the Patriots organization the stiffest fine in league history seems like it can and should be fought.

Can the league office just "dock Cleveland all of its 1st round draft picks for the next 25 years" because it illegally used texting during games? I doubt it. Abuse of power is abuse of power.

ctpatsfan77 · May 13, 2015

Occam's razor: if you have to pick and choose which part of a witness's story you believe, your story probably has a few holes in it.

juny · May 17, 2015

From McCann's Friday article. It addresses my worst fear that Brady gets screwed over by Goodell. Hopefully whoever takes up the case uses the Peterson episode as precedent.

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/15/tom-brady-roger-goodell-deflategate-suspension-appeal

NFL could still prevail

In spite of the successful challenges to the commissioner’s authority discussed above, federal law still accords the NFL high deference in resolving player discipline disputes. The Federal Arbitration Act dictates that arbitration awards—as Goodell’s decision in Brady’s appeal would be—should only be vacated by courts in exceptional circumstances. This deference reflects the idea that if a player and league collectively bargain a dispute-resolution process, courts should let them sort out their disputes through that process. Still, Peterson and the NFLPA met this steep bar by showing that the NFL was inconsistent in applying its own rules.

Deus Irae · May 17, 2015

juny said:
From McCann's Friday article. It addresses my worst fear that Brady gets screwed over by Goodell. Hopefully whoever takes up the case uses the Peterson episode as precedent.

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/15/tom-brady-roger-goodell-deflategate-suspension-appeal

"They had video showing the actual tampering of the balls by the Panthers, yet nobody was fined at all, never mind suspended. In my case, they've got nothing that even purports to show me tampering with the balls, yet I got a 4 game suspension".

That SHOULD be an easy win for Brady.

Rawky77 · May 17, 2015

supafly said:
How are you ever going to prove that they simply made things up, though? Goodell is simply going to claim that he hired an independent investigator with an impeccable reputation, who was experienced in handling NFL affairs. He's then going to claim that the independent investigation produced significant evidence, which Wells pointed out today via his conference call/presser.

The independent investigator will not fly in a court of real law. First you have the attorney client relationship which attaches to the relationship at the outset but even more damming is the fact that JEFF PASH, NFL general counsel was holding Attorney Wells right hand during the entire investigation. Everyone forgot that early on this was announced by the NFL in a press release.

The NFL issued a statement Friday to provide an update on the league's investigation if the Patriots intentionally deflated footballs in the AFC Championship Game against the Colts.

NFL investigation of balls in AFC title game led by Pash, Wells

NFL.com
Published: Jan. 23, 2015 at 01:56 p.m.
Updated: Jan. 24, 2015 at 09:02 p.m.

"The league announced that the investigation is being led by NFL executive vice president Jeff Pash and Ted Wells, an attorney from the Paul Weiss law firm".

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...-of-balls-in-afc-title-game-led-by-pash-wells

Gumby · May 17, 2015

juny said:
From McCann's Friday article. It addresses my worst fear that Brady gets screwed over by Goodell. Hopefully whoever takes up the case uses the Peterson episode as precedent.

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/15/tom-brady-roger-goodell-deflategate-suspension-appeal

Not sure I understand this part? Why would a lawsuit mean turning over your ENTIRE PHONE AND RECORDS to the DEFENDANT for an open ended FISHING EXPEDITION.

If Brady pursues a legal action, he would likely be compelled to turn over his phone and other available data to the NFL.

I can understand you might have to give ACCESS to a court appointed third party to provide messages based on a judge-approved keyword search list to the defendant, but not give up all data to include say conversations about the previous CBA negotiations or his relationship with BB, opponent game strategies etc.

So is there a lawyer type who can explain if this is a typical mediot misunderstanding/bias comment or is there some truth to this?

McCann's Legal Roadmap

PatsFans.com Supporter

He/Him

Hall of Fame Poster

Early Bird Specials

Independent Investigator & pliable af

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Early Bird Specials

PatsFans.com Supporter

Early Bird Specials

Eff you, Shula

Early Bird Specials

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Supporter

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

On the Game Day Roster

In the Starting Line-Up

Similar threads