Lester Munson: Brady has no shot in court

Ross12 said:

OK, why the hell is @thenepatsrule disliking every one of my posts in this thread???

Click to expand...

His username is an anagram for "Lester H Peanut."

Let's go deeper.

"Peanut" as in "Peanut Butter Cups", which are made by a chocolate company called Munson's Chocolates.

https://www.munsonschocolates.com/Peanut-Butter-Cups

"H" as in "hack."

thenepatsrule is Lester "hack" Munson.


Also here's an article pointing out Munson's stupidity regarding the Cardinals/Astros hacking scandal in June: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2...-into-a-major-league-baseball-teams-computer/

All of the arguments were raised in detail in the arbitration hearing, and Goodell answered each one of them in exquisite and persuasive detail in his 20-page opinion.

Michael McCann ‏@McCannSportsLaw Jul 30

Attorney Alan Milstein--who's litigated against NFL--predicts Tom Brady will play in every game: http://sports-law.blogspot.com/2015/07/more-of-brady-bunch.html… (h/t @WALLACHLEGAL)


If you go to the link it explains why Brady is actually better off having this go to the New York court rather than to Minnesota. Regarding the NFL lawyers, "Sometimes lawyers can outthink themselves." He ends with: "My bet is still that Brady plays every game."

Whenever I see something written by Lester I know the contrary opinion is correct. Take these pearls of wisdom...




>>>>>Question: Will Brady succeed in court and stop the NFL from suspending him for four games?

Answer: No, Brady will not succeed. Although he enjoys top-of-the-line legal
representation and his lawyers will file a brilliantly written lawsuit, his
effort to stop the suspension is doomed. There are two reasons why: First,
federal judges are reluctant to reconsider the rulings of arbitrators; second,
Goodell produced a decision on Brady that is brilliantly reasoned, meticulously
detailed, and well-written. Goodell's recitation of the evidence of the tampering with game balls is powerful, and his description of Brady's attempt at a cover-up is persuasive.<<<,
( I don't think I have seen anyone suck up to the league that hard in a long time....)
----------------------------------------
Re overturning arbitration decisions


>>>Courts won't review the merits but
"It is only when the arbitrator strays from
interpretation and application of the agreement and effectively "dispense
his own brand of industrial justice" that his decision may be unenforceable.
When an arbitrator resolves disputes regarding the application of a contract,
and no dishonesty is alleged, the
arbitrator's "improvident, even silly, factfinding" does not provide a basis for a review
ingcourt to refuse to enforce the award. Misco, 484 U.S. at 39<<<<

https://law.duke.edu/publiclaw/supremecourtonline/editedcases/pdf/majvste.pdf

I think the argument is that there was dishonesty (independent investigators were prosecutors as well invoking attorney-client privilege to deny access to notes unlike Rice and Peterson cases) and it was his own brand of induistrial justice..
------------------------------------------
<<<<Even when the arbitrator's award may properly be vacated,
the appropriate remedy is to remand the case for further arbitration
proceedings.<<<<<
How about an independent one this time??????
--------------------------------------------
E

Deus Irae said:

I gave you a like for each one that was disliked, since they weren't undone. It's the best I could do. Sorry you were the subject of abuse.

Click to expand...

Thanks, Deus. Nice of you to do.

BradyFTW! said:

because he's lame and a dipshit

Click to expand...

He did apologize to me, he's alright in my book. It's just a few dislikes on a forum, not the end of the world.

Danny said:

His username is an anagram for "Lester H Peanut."

Let's go deeper.

"Peanut" as in "Peanut Butter Cups", which are made by a chocolate company called Munson's Chocolates.

https://www.munsonschocolates.com/Peanut-Butter-Cups

"H" as in "hack."

thenepatsrule is Lester "hack" Munson.


Also here's an article pointing out Munson's stupidity regarding the Cardinals/Astros hacking scandal in June: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2...-into-a-major-league-baseball-teams-computer/

Click to expand...

Damn, dude. You just did at least 3 times more investigating than Wells, and at least 100 times more than Volin.

Ross12 said:

Thanks, Deus. Nice of you to do.

He did apologize to me, he's alright in my book. It's just a few dislikes on a forum, not the end of the world.

Damn, dude. You just did at least 3 times more investigating than Wells, and at least 100 times more than Volin.

Click to expand...

And 10,000 times more than Lester Munson.

andrewssix said:

Michael McCann ‏@McCannSportsLaw Jul 30

Attorney Alan Milstein--who's litigated against NFL--predicts Tom Brady will play in every game: http://sports-law.blogspot.com/2015/07/more-of-brady-bunch.html… (h/t @WALLACHLEGAL)


If you go to the link it explains why Brady is actually better off having this go to the New York court rather than to Minnesota. Regarding the NFL lawyers, "Sometimes lawyers can outthink themselves." He ends with: "My bet is still that Brady plays every game."

Click to expand...

19-0 instead of 15-4!

Ross12 said:

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...-short-court-challenge-roger-goodell-decision

Lmfao, this guy is seriously the worst. Yeah, Brady has no chance, just like Peterson, and Rice, and Vilma, and.... Oh, wait a minute.

Click to expand...

Brady: Lester Munson has no law license

Danny said:

Also here's an article pointing out Munson's stupidity regarding the Cardinals/Astros hacking scandal in June: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2...-into-a-major-league-baseball-teams-computer/

Click to expand...

Hold on, hold on...I'm laughing too hard here. A presumed 'legal expert' actually said these two things, and he's actually employed by someone?

Q: Is it actually a crime to hack into the data and the files of a Major League Baseball team?
A: It’s certainly ethically questionable, but whether it is a crime is far less certain . . .
==========================
In addition to showing that the stolen information was not otherwise available, the prosecutor must be able to show that Cardinals executives knew they were committing a crime. If the Cardinals’ activity was just a dirty trick or an attempt at getting even with a former colleague, the hacking might not qualify as a crime.

Click to expand...

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! ESPN pays some pretty dumb people lots of money to say some really, really dumb stuff, but this is just too much. This guy is paid for his legal opinions and nothing more, and this is what he's bringing to the table?

"You see, your honor, I didn't know it was a crime to defecate on a park bench in front of a family having a picnic, I'm pretty sure my lawyer here Mr. Munson said I'm all good"

Munson is HILARIOUS. I almost feel like he's gotta be trolling people with opinions this incredibly stupid.

Someone put this dunce in the corner already. While they are at it they can put Volin and his Kraft food and the vacated appeal bs in the other corner

Koma said:

I did a quick search on Munson's opinion on this situation because I thought he was part of the "Brady doesn't want this to go to court" crowd. He has multiple articles in May claiming Brady has no chance in court. I imagine he just changed the date, added the information about the sentence being upheld and the phone being destroyed and turned in the same basic article.

Click to expand...

He certainly doesn't seem to have actually read the NFLPA brief.

Patsfanin Philly said:

Whenever I see something written by Lester I know the contrary opinion is correct. Take these pearls of wisdom...




>>>>>Question: Will Brady succeed in court and stop the NFL from suspending him for four games?

Answer: No, Brady will not succeed. Although he enjoys top-of-the-line legal
representation and his lawyers will file a brilliantly written lawsuit, his
effort to stop the suspension is doomed. There are two reasons why: First,
federal judges are reluctant to reconsider the rulings of arbitrators; second,
Goodell produced a decision on Brady that is brilliantly reasoned, meticulously
detailed, and well-written. Goodell's recitation of the evidence of the tampering with game balls is powerful, and his description of Brady's attempt at a cover-up is persuasive.<<<,
( I don't think I have seen anyone suck up to the league that hard in a long time....)
----------------------------------------
Re overturning arbitration decisions


>>>Courts won't review the merits but
"It is only when the arbitrator strays from
interpretation and application of the agreement and effectively "dispense
his own brand of industrial justice" that his decision may be unenforceable.
When an arbitrator resolves disputes regarding the application of a contract,
and no dishonesty is alleged, the
arbitrator's "improvident, even silly, factfinding" does not provide a basis for a review
ingcourt to refuse to enforce the award. Misco, 484 U.S. at 39<<<<

https://law.duke.edu/publiclaw/supremecourtonline/editedcases/pdf/majvste.pdf

I think the argument is that there was dishonesty (independent investigators were prosecutors as well invoking attorney-client privilege to deny access to notes unlike Rice and Peterson cases) and it was his own brand of induistrial justice..
------------------------------------------
<<<<Even when the arbitrator's award may properly be vacated,
the appropriate remedy is to remand the case for further arbitration
proceedings.<<<<<
How about an independent one this time??????
--------------------------------------------
E

Click to expand...

Holy ****. Munson actually wrote that bolded part? He must have his head buried so far up Goodell's ass to say something like it.

Fencer said:

One Q&A is central to his stupidity, because:

• His claim almost entirely depends on it.
• It's almost entirely wrong.

Click to expand...

This is what made me think he hasn't actually read the NFLPA brief.

Which makes you wonder what ESPN is paying him for.

Kdo5 said:

Holy ****. Munson actually wrote that bolded part? He must have his head buried so far up Goodell's ass to say something like it.

Click to expand...

ESPN surely has a robust legal team handling their various suits, some legit high-power attorneys who know the law inside-out. I wonder what they think about their client using this brain-dead dope for their 'legal expert' columns. Honestly, it must make them cringe, both professionally (knowing he's published legally dubious articles time and again which could come back to bite their client) and personally (knowing Munson is paid handsomely for literally making **** up as he goes).

I don't know if someone already posted this, but I looked at Munson's background to find out why he was disbarred. He was disbarred for "withholding funds owed to a client for whom he obtained a settlement, and neglecting a medical malpractice claim filed on behalf of another client."

But that isn't even the best part. The best part is his statements of how strong Nifong's case was in prosecuting those Duke Lacrosse players.

Remarking that he had “studied this at some length,” he assured Grace’s viewers that “the state has probably a better case than most observers are describing . . . Mr. Nifong is a seasoned, experienced prosecutor. He is not stupid . . . I think that Nifong is probably managing the discovery in such a way that there may be some surprises for these defense lawyers further down the road.” Munson seemed unaware that the state of North Carolina has an open discovery statute.

http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2007/03/lester-munson-legal-expert.html

Kdo5 said:

Holy ****. Munson actually wrote that bolded part? He must have his head buried so far up Goodell's ass to say something like it.

Click to expand...

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...-short-court-challenge-roger-goodell-decision

Sorry I forgot the link the first time....

So how much does Lester Munson get paid? I wanna do his job. It's so easy! I'll just get one of those law degrees from online.