The 15-page briefs filed Friday night

I have NOT yet seen a link to the actual briefs, but I hope one will show up soon in this thread.

McCann, however, has seen and commented on them, in http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/08/07/nf...suspension-deflategate-patriots-roger-goodell . He characterizes them as, unsurprisingly, covering little new ground, instead mainly amplifying what was said before. However, he makes three points:

1. (I think this is covered in another thread too, but so be it.) The league in essence concedes that the Wells report was not independent, but claims it didn't have to be. McCann says that under ordinary circumstances the claim would have been correct, but since they told Brady and the world the report WOULD be independent, they may be legally obligated to live up to that now. (Presumably, McCann is saying that Brady was entitled to know what the process as under which he was investigated and disciplined.)

2. McCann thinks that Brady now has a clear case for defamation.

If Goodell’s accusation against Brady about an apparent bribe is untrue, it would be well within Brady’s rights to file a defamation lawsuit against the NFL. Even though Brady, as a public figure, would need to prove “actual malice” (this means proof the NFL intentionally or knowingly lied), Brady could cite as possible evidence Goodell seemingly misconstruing Brady’s description of conversations with Jastresmki. Brady’s testimony indicated that he had a wide-ranging conversation with Jastremski, rather than, as Goodell portrayed in his order upholding Brady’s suspension, a far more limited (and suspicious) conversation about game ball preparation.

Click to expand...

I think the third sentence of that quote is a bit confused. I'd say instead:

• Goodell lied about the contents of Brady's testimony relating to the Jastremski conversations.
• The lie was a big deal, central to both his case for the original suspension and for it being upheld.
  
• His lie about Brady's testimony at the appeal was cleared up in public about a month later, with the release of the transcripts, but damage had been done.

One complication: We don't yet know what Brady said before the appeal on the subject.

3. The NFL claims that its other losses are irrelevant, because they were about different kinds of player offenses. The NFLPA claims that it's all related, because it's all about procedural violations.

Frankly, I think the main difference is that in domestic violence cases the league changed its policies, while in Brady's case it made up a policy for the first time out of whole cloth. I don't see how the latter could be a better look for them than the former.

Do you know how difficult it must have been for the Attorneys on both sides to frame this issue in a 15 page report, double spaced?? The law office minions must been pulling their hair out..

The lack of independence for the Wells Report is telling and may be critical information... the whole process is flawed, the NFL can make an allegation, they can hire a non independent investigator, pass the judgement to another front office exec and then the commish handles the appeal.. even though it may be prescribed by the CBA, there are whole bunch of due process violations for Brady. .

For me the crux of this is does the current CBA supercede the due process rights of a private citizen of the United States, or does Brady acquiesce these rights when he became a member of the NFLPA???

Without regard the outcome will impact the NFL significantly and they will have to eventually if not very soon relinquish their power over discipline very soon..

This link is from /r Patriots.

https://timinhonolulu.files.wordpre...ion-to-vacate-arbitration-award-brady-nfl.pdf

Edit: During the lock out I was on the owners side.
No longer.
I want anti-trust removed from the League. Removal of arbitration from the Commissioner. All of it, gone.
This completely corrupt process can only be done with support from NFL owners.

They deserve every ounce of pain coming to them.

Blackluck said:

This link is from /r Patriots.

https://timinhonolulu.files.wordpre...ion-to-vacate-arbitration-award-brady-nfl.pdf

Edit: During the lock out I was on the owners side.
No longer.
I want anti-trust removed from the League. Removal of arbitration from the Commissioner. All of it, gone.
This completely corrupt process can only be done with support from NFL owners.

They deserve every ounce of pain coming to them.

Click to expand...

Thanks!

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documen...+motion+to+vacat+labor+arbitrataion+award.pdf appears to be the NFL's brief in opposition to the one you linked. I got a quote from it from a Ben Volin tweet via Reddit, and bootstrapped from there.

Blackluck said:

This link is from /r Patriots.

https://timinhonolulu.files.wordpre...ion-to-vacate-arbitration-award-brady-nfl.pdf

Edit: During the lock out I was on the owners side.
No longer.
I want anti-trust removed from the League. Removal of arbitration from the Commissioner. All of it, gone.
This completely corrupt process can only be done with support from NFL owners.

They deserve every ounce of pain coming to them.

Click to expand...

From my non lawyer and biased eyes, it seems like a good piece... can Brady and his attorneys file "amicus briefs", or do they rely solely on the NFLPA???

The NFL's brief relies heavily on MLBPA vs. Garvey, as in:

• https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-1210.ZPC.html
• http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/stories/2001-05-14-garvey.htm

It should be noted that that was NOT a case about player discipline or anything closely resembling it. Rather, the league screwed the players; a compensation pool of $280 million was established; an arbitrator divvied up the pool among individual players.

This also seems to have been a sort-of but not-entirely SCOTUS decision. I'd appreciate a lawyer explaining clearly how that aspect works.

The NFL basically says that the Peterson precedent is incorrect, because Goodell has unlimited power.

More generally, the NFL's brief boils down to "The arbitrator has full power to decide matters not just of fact, but of law and precedent. Hence no court can ever find the arbitrator to be mistaken in any way."

Fencer said:

The NFL's brief relies heavily on MLBPA vs. Garvey, as in:

• https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-1210.ZPC.html
• http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/stories/2001-05-14-garvey.htm

It should be noted that that was NOT a case about player discipline or anything closely resembling it. Rather, the league screwed the players; a compensation pool of $280 million was established; an arbitrator divvied up the pool among individual players.

This also seems to have been a sort-of but not-entirely SCOTUS decision. I'd appreciate a lawyer explaining clearly how that aspect works.

Click to expand...

It was a SCOTUS decision - it is written per curiam which means that the court is issuing the ruling collectively, as opposed to a series of opinions by the individual justices. Usually, a SCOTUS justice will write the majority opinion and several of the justices will join in that opinion. Several justices will also join in a dissenting opinion written by another Justice.

TommyBrady12 said:

It was a SCOTUS decision - it is written per curiam which means that the court is issuing the ruling collectively, as opposed to a series of opinions by the individual justices. Usually, a SCOTUS justice will write the majority opinion and several of the justices will join in that opinion. Several justices will also join in a dissenting opinion written by another Justice.

Click to expand...

Was there a full hearing, argument, etc.? I get the impression from the article that there somehow wasn't.

In the NFL's frequently changing story as to the basis for Brady's punishment, it is now "Conduct detrimental ...", rather than the Integrity policy that applies only to teams/officials/etc. but not players, and also rather than the policy covering equipment violations by players.

If the league is correct, then ALL other policies are moot, since the "Conduct detrimental ..." policy can cover anything and everything.

Fencer said:

More generally, the NFL's brief boils down to "The arbitrator has full power to decide matters not just of fact, but of law and precedent. Hence no court can ever find the arbitrator to be mistaken in any way."

Click to expand...

I would think that a Judge, who is probably heavily invested in the law, would find such a stance offensive. Not that I would know, but that goes beyond arrogance to me.

At least Wile E Coyote put an umbrella up to try to stop the anvil/boulder from hitting him in the head. Goodell just seems to think it will just bow to his will.

Actually, dictating to the court what the law requires seems to be a standard aspect of legal writing.

Fencer said:

Actually, dictating to the court what the law requires seems to be a standard aspect of legal writing.

Click to expand...

True. but, the law also has structure and (to a degree) balance. Goodell is essentially declaring himself god-emporer as the CBA says he can be. The CBA, i would think, is part of a framework and that framework would have to be based on the governance of law.

Fencer said:

More generally, the NFL's brief boils down to "The arbitrator has full power to decide matters not just of fact, but of law and precedent. Hence no court can ever find the arbitrator to be mistaken in any way."

Click to expand...

NFL: CBA grants the commish power to decide what is fair at its sole discrection.

After reading carefully the Motion to Vacate by Kessler and others,
I will be shocked if the Judge finds for the NFL.

Does the ruling of this case effect a possible defamation suit or would they be completely separate?

Fencer said:

In the NFL's frequently changing story as to the basis for Brady's punishment, it is now "Conduct detrimental ...", rather than the Integrity policy that applies only to teams/officials/etc. but not players, and also rather than the policy covering equipment violations by players.

If the league is correct, then ALL other policies are moot, since the "Conduct detrimental ..." policy can cover anything and everything.

Click to expand...

When they stand before the Judge and if the NFL now changes the basis of punishment after all that has transpired and recorded, do you really think any Judge would not see the attempt to deceive that Judge?
If they have done this, it is an act of desperation.

JR4 said:

After reading carefully the Motion to Vacate by Kessler and others,
I will be shocked if the Judge finds for the NFL.

Click to expand...

I hate to be a "negative Nancy" but the NFL argument of "hey, it doesn't matter how unfair we are/were, a deal's a deal and the NFLPA agreed to this" may be more effective than you might think.

As one of my old law school professors once advised me- they're courts of law, not courts of justice.

Froob said:

Does the ruling of this case effect a possible defamation suit or would they be completely separate?

Click to expand...

I'd say that technically they're separate because this judge is simply ruling on the interpretation of the CBA.

However, if all our dreams come true and he issues a ruling that lambasts the NFL for their conduct and duplicity, then that could come into play, maybe hopefully possibly.