Process & Settlement questions

Why is the judge pushing for settlement?
Why does he care if he spends the next month on this case instead of some other case?
Is it typical for both sides to meet with the judge together & individually before trial?

At this point, why wouldn't Brady's side (other than time) want this to go to trial -- all evidence against Brady is already public -- none of the evidence about Wells is public other than the report.

voluntarysaftey said:

Why is the judge pushing for settlement?

Click to expand...

Because judges always do.

Why does he care if he spends the next month on this case instead of some other case?

Click to expand...

Because in most cases like this, both sides usually cool off and will come to an agreement. That's not the case here. Plus, in his district (NYC) there's probably a huge backlog of cases waiting to be heard and, because of the NFL regular season schedule the NFLPA and NFL pushed their way to the head of the line.

Is it typical for both sides to meet with the judge together & individually before trial?

Click to expand...

Yes.

At this point, why wouldn't Brady's side (other than time) want this to go to trial -- all evidence against Brady is already public -- none of the evidence about Wells is public other than the report.

Click to expand...

I'm sure Brady does want this to go to court because his case is a very strong one.

This is absolutely common. Move beyond the NFLPA v. NFL mess we have before us. In a normal case, there is so much on the line at a trial. One party is going to win and one party is going to lose. Typically, there is no gray area. Trial can have a devastating impact on the losing party. And most of the time, at least in civil cases anyways, there is some room for compromise. So judges seriously push the parties to consider settlement to mitigate the risk for the eventual losing party (and often, believe it or not, judges don't know who the losing party will be before trial).

Meeting with the judge both together and independently is also a tried and true tactic judges use for mediation. As a judge/mediator, you can say certain things with both parties in the room, and you can also really twist arms and get to the point when you have only one party in the room. He can try to gauge each side's "bottom line," without the other side knowing what was said. He can try to coerce a give and take. It often works.

The risk for Brady, like most litigants, is losing. If he wins, obviously he is clear to play and the Court will have found that Goodell abused his powers. If he loses, he gets a four game suspension. If he settles for something, he can perhaps find a result he can live with (e.g., a fine), and eliminate the risk of losing and being suspended. That being said, I think Brady believes (and I agree) that he has a very strong case here. For that reason, I don't see him caving to a reduced suspension. If the NFL insists on some suspension and/or an admission of guilt, I believe Brady will see this litigation through to its end.

Answer......he wants to free his calendar to vacation in the Hamptons in September...a more relaxed, more affordable time to visit