Wallach: Good Chance for re-hearing En Banc

JarOfMayo51 said:

I was under the impression that Kessler was like a God in the court room, but he came across as amatuerish and was put in his place by a federal judge on several occasions. Truly disappointing.

Click to expand...

Not much you can do when two of the judges basically make it clear before you even get to speak that they will likely be ruling against you.

I see you forgot that he wiped the floor with the nfl when there was a fair and balanced judge presiding and not one of John Mara's Fordham law buddies.

Also realize that this was 2-1 decision, not 3-0. The 1 dissenter was the Chief Judge of the 2nd circuit of appeals and his dissension killed the nfl.

ANGR89 said:

is there a ruling expected soon in the Peterson case? I keep seeing that case thrown out there but haven't heard if it's close to being decided.

Click to expand...

Yes any day now. The appeal was heard in Oct and as we know many judges have their mind made up before oral argument.

I'm not sure why it's not handed down yet it's overdue. No question that if the decision is upheld it helps Bradys case. It's not right that he gets treated differently because the NFL forum shopped the 2nd circuit.

AllstonPatsFan said:

Yes any day now. The appeal was heard in Oct and as we know many judges have their mind made up before oral argument.

I'm not sure why it's not handed down yet it's overdue. No question that if the decision is upheld it helps Bradys case. It's not right that he gets treated differently because the NFL forum shopped the 2nd circuit.

Click to expand...

I don't exactly claim to be an expert on CA8, but I read an article that said they typically hand down appeal rulings within 90 days, so Peterson's ruling was expected around January. Obviously, as you mention, it is overdue. I am almost left to wonder if they were watching CA2.

PatsFanSince74 said:

The only motivations that the League would have to negotiate or take any actions favorable to Brady are, therefore, somewhere between slim and none...but still not Zero. If a viable path that could cause the Owners embarrassment were to open up for Brady, then they would have to come back to the table, but I'm not holding my breath for that outcome.

Click to expand...

Actually there's one other motivation I can think of (though it's also a very long shot) and that would be if Goodell and his entourage were subpoenaed to testify under oath at a congressional hearing. Then he might be willing to cut a deal to try to make that go away.

AllstonPatsFan said:

I'm not sure why it's not handed down yet it's overdue. No question that if the decision is upheld it helps Bradys case. It's not right that he gets treated differently because the NFL forum shopped the 2nd circuit.

Click to expand...

The NFL is in NYC. It's hardly forum-shopping to file your legal action in the federal district you're actually located in.

As for being treated differently, it happens all the time. That's why the term "circuit split" exists in the first place.

TommyBrady12 said:

Even if the 2nd circuit heard the case en banc, brady's attorneys would still have to convince 7 other judges of the 14 to overturn it (he needs 8 votes, including katzman. Parker and chin will vote against him so he is already down 2-1). It's a tall order, and if you couple that to the fact that federal courts have a tradition of not disturbing arbitration results then it makes even more difficult.

Click to expand...

Also, I read an article talking about the fact that CA2 has only granted 8 en banc petitions in 11 years that mentioned the 3-judge panels in CA2 routinely circulate their draft opinions to all the circuit court judges so they can weigh in to some degree as the opinions are being written precisely so that en banc reviews are minimized because the judges will feel less of a need to vote for one because they've already been able to put their oar in to some extent.

JMC00 said:

In case you haven't been paying attention from under your bridge, it's 2-2. 4 federal judges being split on this and the 1 dissenter was the chief judge who wrote a strongly worded dissension. Has a lot better chance than most cases.

Click to expand...

Better chance still means almost no chance. It's over.