McCann: Going to be a very tense hearing on Deflategate.

Jackson 2 · Jan 30, 2016

Rob0729 said:
Sorry, I misread your post because you had two completely different thoughts in one paragraph. One sentence you were talking about the defamation and the next you switched to the appeal and I missed that.

No apology necessary.

XLIX · Jan 30, 2016

Jackson 2 said:
Of course you're not.

So in other words, we're back to Doty was a Reagan appointee and he has been the NFLPA's best friend over the past several years. Hence, political partisanship doesn't seem to be all that big of a deal in pro sports labor wars.

Jackson 2 · Jan 30, 2016

XLIX said:
So in other words, we're back to Doty was a Reagan appointee and he has been the NFLPA's best friend over the past several years. Hence, political partisanship doesn't seem to be all that big of a deal in pro sports labor wars.

OK, whatever you want to believe. If you researched it as I suggested, you'd learn that his appointment was part of a larger deal between Tip O'Neill and Ronbo. Jesus, can you ever admit you might have been mistaken? Rhetorical question. Answer: no. The political and racist turn in this message board in the last few days has been eye-opening, to say the least.

PatsFanSince74 · Jan 30, 2016

Another stunningly bad commentary by someone who fancies himself an "expert.". Of course it's going to be "tense," there is a lot at stake for both sides. But it is also going to be short as each side typically only gets 30 minutes for oral argument. The rest is in the briefs filed bilaterally and in any written responses requested by the judges. There will be no high drama like we had last summer since neither Brady nor Goodell will be present.

We'll know a lot more when the panel is named a week or so before the Appeal Hearing. It's possible that one or other of the Judges might tip their hand during questioning, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

The NFL has indeed gone "all in" with a powerhouse Appellate legal team and it is unlikely that Kessler will argue the case himself, but leave the talking to the NFLPA's Appellate counsel, who, while highly competent does not bring the wattage of the League's attorneys.

The most important information we will get will be the identities of the three judges. The Second Circuit has judges who go all the way back to Carter and.Reagan, though the majority were appointed by BHO, GWB, WJC and GHWB. That is almost too broad a range of ideological ground to contemplate.

PatsFanSince74 · Jan 30, 2016

VectorPrime said:
Justice Berman CLEARLY took into account factors that technically weren't relevant to the specific case of Goodell and the CBA. He openly called out how absurd the deflategate scandal was from the get go, he specifically pointed out how Goodell and the NFL continued to change his story on how involved Brady was with the alleged scheme (going from "generally aware" to being a direct mastermind). And while he didn't use those in his ruling, he brought them out in the courtroom. There is no reason why these judges won't do the exact same thing.

or they could take the view that the facts are irrelevant and define the matter more narrowly

ivanvamp · Jan 30, 2016

The simple question, IMO, is whether Doty was correct in ruling that Goodell violated the law of the shop. It seems fairly simple. The NFL's argument basically is (as has been said already) that Goodell has the power to issue whatever penalty he wants. That even if a federal judge thought the penalty is outrageous, or that Goodell shouldn't have issued ANY penalty at all because there's no evidence of wrongdoing, that none of that matters because the CBA grants Goodell this power.

The NFLPA's position is that yes, within reason, Goodell has the power to issue penalties for wrongdoing. But Goodell can't simply do WHATEVER THE HELL HE WANTS. The rulebook has penalties listed for a reason, and while Goodell indeed has some latitude (like a judge fining a person $500 instead of $100 for a speeding ticket), he can't simply issue ANY penalty. That is, if the rulebook says football tampering is a $25,000 fine, Goodell, while being granted some latitude to increase that, can't just suspend Brady for three seasons for that. In other words, the NFL's argument that Goodell can do whatever he wants is fundamentally flawed and even the CBA is governed by US Labor law.

Given what we know of the case, I can't see how the NFL wins this. Goodell clearly is way, way, way out of bounds with how he handled all of this.

PatsFanSince74 · Jan 30, 2016

SVN said:
Nothing is predictable wrt to lawyers and courtrooms.anything can happen.

especially when Appellate judges with egos the size of the great outdoors are involved

PatsFanSince74 · Jan 30, 2016

Ivan said:
We will see. I don't think the NFL brought Paul Clement in to argue PSI I think they brought him in because Solicitor Generals get the attention of appellate courts and they are going to argue the case on the broader ramifications of upholding deference to arbitration and not the fairness of the Brady appeal before Goodell. Kessler will argue that arbitration is only binding if conducted fairly, which is in line with Berman's ruling.

that pretty much sums it up. Well done!

QuantumMechanic · Jan 30, 2016

Rob0729 said:
But is court filings really protected when the language is blatant lies and defamatory? Especially when the judge specifically ordered that all court filings would be made public?

If the filer doesn't distribute them himself, the filings have an absolute privilege against liability. That's a doctrine that goes all the way back to the founding of the US and even back to pre-colonial England. And yes, it applies when the court makes things public (and of course court filings are public by default).

The courts and legislatures have long viewed the ability of a party to make his case in his own words to trump reputational damage to others.

QuantumMechanic · Jan 30, 2016

ivanvamp said:
That is, if the rulebook says football tampering is a $25,000 fine, Goodell, while being granted some latitude to increase that, can't just suspend Brady for three seasons for that.

The rulebook doesn't limit the discipline for tampering with the balls to $25000. It says "...subject to discipline including, but not limited to, a fine of $25000."

XLIX · Jan 30, 2016

Jackson 2 said:
OK, whatever you want to believe. If you researched it as I suggested, you'd learn that his appointment was part of a larger deal between Tip O'Neill and Ronbo. Jesus, can you ever admit you might have been mistaken? Rhetorical question. Answer: no. The political and racist turn in this message board in the last few days has been eye-opening, to say the least.

Mistaken about what? I said he was a Reagan appointee. You have given us nothing to contradict that fact.

Essentially what you're saying is "I'm right and you're wrong and if you don't believe me, go research it." I wouldn't try out for Harvard debate if I were you.

PatsFanSince74 · Jan 30, 2016

XLIX said:
I know that's the conventional wisdom, but this isn't exactly your typical management/labor dispute, so I'm not sure traditional partisanship holds true.

The NFLPA has no greater ally than Judge Doty, and he was a Reagan appointee.

Doty was nominated by RWR in February 1987. That is important because the 100th Congress was seated in January of that year and Democrats controlled the Senate for the first time in six years. The Senate has to confirm Circuit Court judges. With the Democrats in control of the Judiciary committee for the first time in years there was no way they would send one of the first high level judiciary nominees to the floor on their watch unless they liked him...in other words, a lame duck Reagan with less than two years in his final term didn't get "his guy.". Tip was still running the House and I'd bet a month's wages that his hands were all over this as well.

VectorPrime · Jan 30, 2016

Jackson 2 said:
Answer: no. The political and racist turn in this message board in the last few days has been eye-opening, to say the least.

Is it the Cam thread? I've been intentionally avoiding going in there because I can only imagine how bad it is.

Patsfanin Philly · Jan 30, 2016

PatsFanSince74 said:
Doty was nominated by RWR in February 1987. That is important because the 100th Congress was seated in January of that year and Democrats controlled the Senate for the first time in six years. The Senate has to confirm Circuit Court judges. With the Democrats in control of the Judiciary committee for the first time in years there was no way they would send one of the first high level judiciary nominees to the floor on their watch unless they liked him...in other words, a lame duck Reagan with less than two years in his final term..... didn't get "his guy.". Tip was still running the House and I'd bet a month's wages that his hands were all over this as well.

Which is why you have Supreme Court Justice Kennedy and not Robert Bork. Bork was too conservative/extreme to get approved by a Democratic Senate and in fact IIRC about 5 or 6 Republicna Senators voted against him.

Patsfanin Philly · Jan 30, 2016

Rob0729 said:
I don't expect a defamation suit, but because Brady doesn't want his life torn apart in a trial. But Brady would likely file in Massachusetts State Court (according to Michael McCann) and that would favor him.

And whether a judge is prolabor or promanagement wouldn't matter in a defamation case. It isn't a labor issue. And likely it would be a jury trial (which would favor Brady too).

How fast can the NFl ask for a change of venue? I would love to have the judge deny it claiming that the NFL could get a fair trial....
I would love to see voir dire ( jury selection questioning)
"Are you a Patriots fan?"
"No sir, I watch the games once in a while" meanwhile the guy is praying/hoping to get on the jury.... if only to be close to Brady ( or Giselle) or BB.....(and he's wearing a #12 or #87 jersey under his shirt...)
*
As long as it isn't an #81 jersey for obvious reasons...Th

YOUGOTMOSSED · Jan 30, 2016

ivanvamp said:
The simple question, IMO, is whether Doty was correct in ruling that Goodell violated the law of the shop. It seems fairly simple. The NFL's argument basically is (as has been said already) that Goodell has the power to issue whatever penalty he wants. That even if a federal judge thought the penalty is outrageous, or that Goodell shouldn't have issued ANY penalty at all because there's no evidence of wrongdoing, that none of that matters because the CBA grants Goodell this power.

The NFLPA's position is that yes, within reason, Goodell has the power to issue penalties for wrongdoing. But Goodell can't simply do WHATEVER THE HELL HE WANTS. The rulebook has penalties listed for a reason, and while Goodell indeed has some latitude (like a judge fining a person $500 instead of $100 for a speeding ticket), he can't simply issue ANY penalty. That is, if the rulebook says football tampering is a $25,000 fine, Goodell, while being granted some latitude to increase that, can't just suspend Brady for three seasons for that. In other words, the NFL's argument that Goodell can do whatever he wants is fundamentally flawed and even the CBA is governed by US Labor law.

Given what we know of the case, I can't see how the NFL wins this. Goodell clearly is way, way, way out of bounds with how he handled all of this.

Goodell "won" when Kraft caved in. The damage is done in the lost draft picks with no apparent recourse for anyone against Goodell regardless of how arbitrary and capricious it was.

If Berman's decision is reversed and, accordingly, Goodell is essentially deemed to have all of the powers of 15th Century Spanish Grand Inquisitor, his victory will be complete.

Jackson 2 · Jan 30, 2016

XLIX said:
Mistaken about what? I said he was a Reagan appointee. You have given us nothing to contradict that fact.

Essentially what you're saying is "I'm right and you're wrong and if you don't believe me, go research it." I wouldn't try out for Harvard debate if I were you.

OK, you're correct and no one should ever be foolish enough to challenge you on anything. What a douche. Now, before you get your little weenie in a bunch about being insulted, realize what an intransigent dink you are. See post # 72.

Jackson 2 · Jan 30, 2016

PatsFanSince74 said:
Doty was nominated by RWR in February 1987. That is important because the 100th Congress was seated in January of that year and Democrats controlled the Senate for the first time in six years. The Senate has to confirm Circuit Court judges. With the Democrats in control of the Judiciary committee for the first time in years there was no way they would send one of the first high level judiciary nominees to the floor on their watch unless they liked him...in other words, a lame duck Reagan with less than two years in his final term didn't get "his guy.". Tip was still running the House and I'd bet a month's wages that his hands were all over this as well.

Honestly, historical accuracy such as yours has no place in this wilderness of bull ****. Be careful.

PatsFanSince74 · Jan 30, 2016

Patsfanin Philly said:
Which is why you have Supreme Court Justice Kennedy and not Robert Bork. Bork was too conservative/extreme to get approved by a Democratic Senate and in fact IIRC about 5 or 6 Republicna Senators voted against him.

Right. When Reagan was President, the House was always under the control of the Democrats, but the Senate was Republican until his last two years (100th Congress). The message was very clear that the only way he could get a District or Circuit Court Judge past the Senate was to play ball. At that point, Reagan's legacy was set, so these were easy "gives" for the WH.

PatsFanSince74 · Jan 30, 2016

YOUGOTMOSSED said:
Goodell "won" when Kraft caved in. The damage is done in the lost draft picks with no apparent recourse for anyone against Goodell regardless of how arbitrary and capricious it was.

If Berman's decision is reversed and, accordingly, Goodell is essentially deemed to have all of the powers of 15th Century Spanish Grand Inquisitor, his victory will be complete.

...and the Players will strike for as long as it takes when the CBA is up for renewal, so his victory would be Pyrrhic.

McCann: Going to be a very tense hearing on Deflategate.

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Burn it all down!

Burn it all down!

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Similar threads