Alan Millstein: Brady's chances of en banc hearing dramatically improved with latest amicus filings

RecoveringCowboy said:

Don't you want him to be retired and know he will be reviled as the worst NFL commissioner of all time before he dies?

Click to expand...

Sociopaths don't feel shame.

Silver Blue&Red said:

Who cares what percentage? They are going to hear the en banc, and win. If we want to guess percentages, I say 100 percent. I just feel that our justice system cannot be that currupt. If not, I've lost all hope in this country. And that would really seal the deal on my opinion of how bad the condition of this country is.

Click to expand...

It was shot long ago. Watch Making of a Murderer or The Jinx for further confirmation. For that matter I'm sure there are dozens and dozens of documentaries exposing the same flawed system. It's a win loss system, not a justice system.

As far as this case goes I'm really confident Brady will win in the end, but the reason won't be justice it will be ineptitude on Goodell's part. Had he simply declared they were sanctioning Brady for the findings of the Wells Report (screwed up as it was) then the appeal would hold and the NFL would win, however his ineptitude as an arbitrator opened the door for Brady because Goodell didn't uphold the initial sanction he created new grounds for the sanctions, and that won't hold ground in this appeal. Between Olson and Feinberg they are arguing that Brady didn't actually get an appeal and Goodell went beyond the CBA in dispensing his decision, and neither are acceptable practices for an arbitrator.

This is going to be heard by the Supreme Court of the United States. It simply has to be.

That is the only freaking fitting cherry on top of this lunacy sundae.

I'd love to hear Berman's thoughts on Chin and Parker. Guessing he'd have a lot of negative things to say.

Why was there not this effort when the NFL appealed Berman's ruling?? Have to wonder if all the high powered amicus briefs were filed at that time the outcome might be different, Goodell would be on his knees asking for an en banc hearing...

Not doing so might be a big mistake for the Brady legal team....

DarrylS said:

Why was there not this effort when the NFL appealed Berman's ruling?? Have to wonder if all the high powered amicus briefs were filed at that time the outcome might be different, Goodell would be on his knees asking for an en banc hearing...

Not doing so might be a big mistake for the Brady legal team....

Click to expand...

It was Kessler. He wanted to do the appeal by himself so that he can say he beat the NFL from start to finish in the Brady case. and brady doesn't know anything about lawyers like which lawyer is best for trials, which one is best for appeals, etc., so he just went with whomever.

DarrylS said:

Why was there not this effort when the NFL appealed Berman's ruling?? Have to wonder if all the high powered amicus briefs were filed at that time the outcome might be different, Goodell would be on his knees asking for an en banc hearing...

Not doing so might be a big mistake for the Brady legal team....

Click to expand...

Frankly I don't think Brady's team thought there was a chance in hell that Berman would get overturned. They just got a bad draw with to retired judges. The facts that they may now get a hearing by the full court rest with the dissenting opinion of the chief judge and all the amicus briefs filed by various high ranking and reputable sources. Also the fact that Brady's team has made it clear ( by hiring Olsen) that they will bring this to the Supreme Court.

Judges hate to be overturned, and maybe the fear of the Supreme Court doing just that will make them grant Brady a full hearing. What is really import at to know is that the retired judges who ruled against Brady do not have a voice in the decision to grant an en blank hearing so you would logically say that right now Brady has the Chief Judge and Berman's votes.

If anyone tells you they know with even a modicum of certain what a court is going to do with a particular case, then they have not worked with the courts. The only thing predictable about judges and juries is that they are unpredictable.

To everyone who posts on this topic, including some very helpful posts, the man's name is OLSON, not OLSEN.

GrogansArmy said:

I'd love to hear Berman's thoughts on Chin and Parker. Guessing he'd have a lot of negative things to say.

Click to expand...

Not sure about that. In fact, over the decades, I'd imagine that Chin and Parker have both upheld many of Berman's rulings. On the other hand, I think he might have a few choice words for the decision to let Kessler, who is not an Appellate Lawyer, get in over his head by arguing the appeal against someone of Clement's stature.

FreeTedWilliams said:

Frankly I don't think Brady's team thought there was a chance in hell that Berman would get overturned. They just got a bad draw with to retired judges. The facts that they may now get a hearing by the full court rest with the dissenting opinion of the chief judge and all the amicus briefs filed by various high ranking and reputable sources. Also the fact that Brady's team has made it clear ( by hiring Olsen) that they will bring this to the Supreme Court.

Judges hate to be overturned, and maybe the fear of the Supreme Court doing just that will make them grant Brady a full hearing. What is really import at to know is that the retired judges who ruled against Brady do not have a voice in the decision to grant an en blank hearing so you would logically say that right now Brady has the Chief Judge and Berman's votes.

If anyone tells you they know with even a modicum of certain what a court is going to do with a particular case, then they have not worked with the courts. The only thing predictable about judges and juries is that they are unpredictable.

Click to expand...

Why take a chance it might have been easier and more effective to solicit these Amicus briefs during the NFL's appeal?? Whether they believe as you indicate, they needed to hedge their bets..

Having spent more than my fair share of time in various courts do agree with judicial uncertainty..

TommyBrady12 said:

It was Kessler. He wanted to do the appeal by himself so that he can say he beat the NFL from start to finish in the Brady case. and brady doesn't know anything about lawyers like which lawyer is best for trials, which one is best for appeals, etc., so he just went with whomever.

Click to expand...

It was Dee Smith's call on Kessler. He blew it not Brady.

JMC00 said:

A year ago this wasn't a case Ted Olsen would take.

Click to expand...

He would have taken the appeals hearing four months ago though. Jeffrey Kesseller should have never have been the lead attorney during the appeal.

Seems to me to be the triumph of hope over facts when we've gone from a less than .5% chance to a 50% chance without hearing one peep from the people actually going to make the decision.

Is Alan Millstein significant outside of this statement? It looks like he is just a NJ lawyer who happens to be friends with Wallach, who is himself not all that significant of a legal opinion at this point.

robertweathers said:

It was Dee Smith's call on Kessler. He blew it not Brady.

Click to expand...

Still, kessler could have said no and turned the case over to steffen johnson. No one forced kessler to do anything.

Also don yee could have spoken up.

NE_Zealot said:

Still not buying in until they decide to grant en banc. Don't count the proverbial chickens yet!

Click to expand...

Agreed. A 50% increase of his chances, from 5% to 10%. A dramatic increase, I suppose, but still...

That's a 100% increase 5 to 10

TommyBrady12 said:

It was Kessler. He wanted to do the appeal by himself so that he can say he beat the NFL from start to finish in the Brady case. and brady doesn't know anything about lawyers like which lawyer is best for trials, which one is best for appeals, etc., so he just went with whomever.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure Kessler, Smith, and the NFLPA were expecting a supposedly respected lawyer, Paul Clement, to outright lie in court. They never seemed to recover from that.

TommyBrady12 said:

Still, kessler could have said no and turned the case over to steffen johnson. No one forced kessler to do anything.

Also don yee could have spoken up.

Click to expand...

Yep.

I suspect what happened is that Dee(a fmr USDA who knows this) put Steffan Johnson in there as the eventual lead council for the appeal but Kessler talked his way into it selling the fact that the same argument used with Berman would be equally effective this time around. Obviously it was with Katz but not with Chin and Parker.