NFL Appeal oral arguments thread

Jlaff said:

Wait, so Felger is in the NFL is corrupt group now? I hadn't been paying attention to him.

Click to expand...

Wise, wise approach you have there...

Is there any estimation on when a verdict will be reached? Or what happens next (prior to a verdict)?

Robdude said:

Is there any estimation on when a verdict will be reached? Or what happens next (prior to a verdict)?

Click to expand...

Probably after June but who knows, and since it's not a trial we can expect a "ruling" from the court not a "verdict."

Robdude said:

Is there any estimation on when a verdict will be reached? Or what happens next (prior to a verdict)?

Click to expand...

April or later. The court seemed to indicate during oral arguments it would rule sooner rather than later, but you never know. The Peterson appeal has been sitting with the 8th Circuit for six months, for example.

Prior to a decision nothing will happen unless the sides (hahahahaha) reach a settlement.

MassPats38 said:

Understand each judge is assisted by 4 attorneys (for that court, think Yale, Harvard, etc. graduates - far from stupid individuals).

Click to expand...

Actually, some of the dumbest lawyers I've encountered have degrees from Ivy league schools. These schools really aren't what they used to be as far as quality of education or merit of the student.

I started my legal career as a law clerk for a state court. Most clerks are just young guys out of law school transitioning into the real world. Even the intelligent ones are lacking in enough real experience to have sound judgement on anything.

Question.....I just had a news Alert pop up on my phone that says Roger Goodell will not restore Patriots draft pick and he's unaware of the rumor of a possible deal with the NFL and Brady. where the hell are these rumors coming from? this is the first I've heard of it and I don't want Brady to settle for any deal with the NFL unless it's that they will admit this whole thing was bogus and he won't sue them!

So Goody is still a science denier? No shock.

ANGR89 said:

Question.....I just had a news Alert pop up on my phone that says Roger Goodell will not restore Patriots draft pick and he's unaware of the rumor of a possible deal with the NFL and Brady. where the hell are these rumors coming from? this is the first I've heard of it and I don't want Brady to settle for any deal with the NFL unless it's that they will admit this whole thing was bogus and he won't sue them!

Click to expand...

I assume that was the thing with talk about talking punishment authority away from the Commissioner and it was stated that for the NFLPA to agree all currently pending cases would be settled. However the talk of that agreement was extremely premature.

SVN said:

Click to expand...

At least we got a fair and impartial consideration of the totality of evidence.

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

Actually, some of the dumbest lawyers I've encountered have degrees from Ivy league schools. These schools really aren't what they used to be as far as quality of education or merit of the student.

I started my legal career as a law clerk for a state court. Most clerks are just young guys out of law school transitioning into the real world. Even the intelligent ones are lacking in enough real experience to have sound judgement on anything.

Click to expand...

State clerkships are not remotely comparable to federal clerkships. Federal law clerks at all levels are the 1% elite of all law schools who tend to go on to large firms and big pay days, as firms want that background and unique experience. It is part of the career plan. State law clerks at the non-appellate level, at least in the states I have encountered, are looking for a firm job and accept the low pay and firm contact in lieu of no pay. State appellate clerks can sometimes transition to federal district court clerkships.

Students from non-top 25% law schools may get a federal district court clerkship if in the top 5 or 10 of their class. Anything higher in terms of courts is highly improbable at best. The circuit courts clerkships tend to be the best students of the schools in the top 25% of law schools who don't become Supreme Court clerks. Supreme Court clerks are the best of the top 10 schools, often the top 5 schools.

Calling federal clerks clueless, given what it takes to make that cut, sounds like sour grapes. There tends to be a very ordered and encouraged process in law schools for federal clerkship applications, and most applicants receive lots of rejection letters in that process. If you didn't work in the federal court, then I would not venture an assessment of the clerk capabilities in those jobs. You likely have no idea what they do on a given day.

MassPats38 said:

State clerkships are not remotely comparable to federal clerkships. Federal law clerks at all levels are the 1% elite of all law schools who tend to go on to large firms and big pay days, as firms want that background and unique experience. It is part of the career plan. State law clerks at the non-appellate level, at least in the states I have encountered, are looking for a firm job and accept the low pay and firm contact in lieu of no pay. State appellate clerks can sometimes transition to federal district court clerkships.

Students from non-top 25% law schools may get a federal district court clerkship if in the top 5 or 10 of their class. Anything higher in terms of courts is highly improbable at best. The circuit courts clerkships tend to be the best students of the schools in the top 25% of law schools who don't become Supreme Court clerks. Supreme Court clerks are the best of the top 10 schools, often the top 5 schools.

Calling federal clerks clueless, given what it takes to make that cut, sounds like sour grapes. There tends to be a very ordered and encouraged process in law schools for federal clerkship applications, and most applicants receive lots of rejection letters in that process. If you didn't work in the federal court, then I would not venture an assessment of the clerk capabilities in those jobs. You likely have no idea what they do on a given day.

Click to expand...

They're the bright eyed/bushy tailed law babies in tow behind the judge when he enters the court. They anxiously jot down notes during the orals. They do the exact same thing I did at the state level. They make less than $80k/year which, for all practical purposes, make them "poor" by NYC living standards.

Like any recent law school grad, they known d*ck. Most hope that they land a job with a firm like Clement's (or Kessler's) after their gig with the feds is up.

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

They're the bright eyed/bushy tailed law babies in tow behind the judge when he enters the court. They anxiously jot down notes during the orals. They do the exact same thing I did at the state level. They make less than $80k/year which, for all practical purposes, make them "poor" by NYC living standards.

Like any recent law school grad, they known d*ck. Most hope that they land a job with a firm like Clement's (or Kessler's) after their gig with the feds is up.

Click to expand...

Come on man.. Thats like saying people who Graduate juliard, peabody, oberlin dont know anything about classical music cause they dont play in the london philharmonic. While this is true to some extent alot of people who wind up with those gigs start where these people are. Mocking people for a lack of practicle experience is always a good idea... Until they get that experience and suddenly are out performing you. Also, Im guessing the pull of working for a federal judge is experience and connections not starting salary. While i agree its foolish not to recognize that excellence comes in all shapes, sizes, and schools.. I would also argue that dismissing people who at a young age have achieved what very few people could even dream of achieving at that stage in their life is equally as foolish.

Bledsoehasaring said:

Come on man.. Thats like saying people who Graduate juliard, peabody, oberlin dont know anything about classical music cause they dont play in the london philharmonic. While this is true to some extent alot of people who wind up with those gigs start where these people are. Mocking people for a lack of practicle experience is always a good idea... Until they get that experience and suddenly are out performing you. Also, Im guessing the pull of working for a federal judge is experience and connections not starting salary. While i agree its foolish not to recognize that excellence comes in all shapes, sizes, and schools.. I would also argue that dismissing people who at a young age have achieved what very few people could even dream of achieving at that stage in their life is equally as foolish.

Click to expand...

It's a prestigious gig, no doubt. It's a great opportunity, no doubt. It opens doors for great career opportunities in the future, no doubt. The problem is, they're still kids out of law school. Law school simply does not prepare you for the realities of the practice of law. These clerkship are a nice transitional job between law school and becoming a lawyer but that's it.

I was simply responding to the theory that we shouldn't worry if the the panel we got stuck with consists of lousy judges who are too lazy to read the record because these brilliant law clerks will sort this out.

It's also naive to believe that even if one of the clerks brings up Clement's misrepresentation to the judge that anything will come of it. What do you suppose that conversation will be like?

"Hi judge! I'm going over the record and drafting a decision ruling the way you want to on this Brady thing. We got a letter from that law school professor pointing out that Clement may have stretched the record a bit during orals. I know you and Clement are members of the same country club and have a tee off time on the golf course latter this week so I thought I should mention it to you. Let me know if this changes anything."

Is Felger part of the duo that had Matt Light on the other day? If so, I watched the video of Matt Light on talking about this.. you know framejob. Anyway they end up getting Matt Light riled up, talking loudly etc.. and as the clip finishes you can see the smirk on one, towards probably a producer as they knew they got there meat and two veg from Matt Light for falling for there trolling crap.

The smirk said it all.. and why I generally don't listen to the wind up merchants on the radio in particular.

Stumbled across this article on Paul Clement. Apparently he bills out at $1,100/hour with the justification that he possesses "skills, experiences, and reputations not easily comparable to or found in local counsel.” I guess by "skills" he means he has enough juice to lie with impunity in Federal Court with the whole world watching.

Federal Judge Says Paul Clement Isn’t Special Enough To Command Insane Hourly Rates

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

It's a prestigious gig, no doubt. It's a great opportunity, no doubt. It opens doors for great career opportunities in the future, no doubt. The problem is, they're still kids out of law school. Law school simply does not prepare you for the realities of the practice of law. These clerkship are a nice transitional job between law school and becoming a lawyer but that's it.

I was simply responding to the theory that we shouldn't worry if the the panel we got stuck with consists of lousy judges who are too lazy to read the record because these brilliant law clerks will sort this out.

It's also naive to believe that even if one of the clerks brings up Clement's misrepresentation to the judge that anything will come of it. What do you suppose that conversation will be like?

"Hi judge! I'm going over the record and drafting a decision ruling the way you want to on this Brady thing. We got a letter from that law school professor pointing out that Clement may have stretched the record a bit during orals. I know you and Clement are members of the same country club and have a tee off time on the golf course latter this week so I thought I should mention it to you. Let me know if this changes anything."

Click to expand...

Without exception, every federal clerk ive known has been bright, curious,opinionated, and anal. Thats how they got to be fed clerks. Without question,they know the record better than any of us on this board, and would not prepare a draft opinion that passed Clement's statement off as fact.

letekro said:

Without exception, every federal clerk ive known has been bright, curious,opinionated, and anal. Thats how they got to be fed clerks. Without question,they know the record better than any of us on this board, and would not prepare a draft opinion that passed Clement's statement off as fact.

Click to expand...

I'm not sh*tting on law clerks. I'm just trying to keep it real.

For Pete's sake, have you seen the current state of our federal government? The previous attorney general was gun running. The presumptive Democrat presidential nominee may soon be indicted for violating the Espionage Act. The IRS was under fire for targeting political opposition for the current administration. The NSA is spying on us. Jon Corzine isn't in prison.

In this current culture, I'm supposed to believe that a few "fresh off the farm" law clerks are going to keep the judges honest?

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

They're the bright eyed/bushy tailed law babies in tow behind the judge when he enters the court. They anxiously jot down notes during the orals. They do the exact same thing I did at the state level. They make less than $80k/year which, for all practical purposes, make them "poor" by NYC living standards.

Like any recent law school grad, they known d*ck. Most hope that they land a job with a firm like Clement's (or Kessler's) after their gig with the feds is up.

Click to expand...

I'm done law school in a month and have an appeal from a tribunal I'll be dealing with on my own within a week of that. Lol, thanks for the confidence boost!

But I have to say I've really appreciated your insight throughout this thread, as you'll note I've agreed with a number of your posts.

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

I'm not sh*tting on law clerks. I'm just trying to keep it real.

For Pete's sake, have you seen the current state of our federal government? The previous attorney general was gun running. The presumptive Democrat presidential nominee may soon be indicted for violating the Espionage Act. The IRS was under fire for targeting political opposition for the current administration. The NSA is spying on us. Jon Corzine isn't in prison.

In this current culture, I'm supposed to believe that a few "fresh off the farm" law clerks are going to keep the judges honest?

Click to expand...

Obviously, a very political post. I will just say that I think you are selling the overwhelming majority of fed judges and fed clerks well short. State court, well, that's another matter entirely.