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

Gronkowski123 said:

when we get news if the hearing will be granted?? couple more weeks?

Click to expand...

I would assume within this month.

Gronkowski123 said:

when we get news if the hearing will be granted?? couple more weeks?

Click to expand...

@WallachLegal thinks by the end of this week or next CA2 will order the NFL to file a reply brief.

If they do so, that means CA2 won't be dismissing Brady's request out of hand (doesn't mean they won't ultimately dismiss it, though).

Wallach also pointed out that in CA2's most recent en banc they took nine months from when the reply brief was submitted to when they made the decision to grant en banc review.

QuantumMechanic said:

@WallachLegal thinks by the end of this week or next CA2 will order the NFL to file a reply brief.

If they do so, that means CA2 won't be dismissing Brady's request out of hand (doesn't mean they won't ultimately dismiss it, though).

Wallach also pointed out that in CA2's most recent en banc they took nine months from when the reply brief was submitted to when they made the decision to grant en banc review.

Click to expand...

I am sure this has been answered before i just cant find it, is the suspension stayed during the time it takes for the CA2 to decide on whether he will receive en banc

QuantumMechanic said:

@WallachLegal thinks by the end of this week or next CA2 will order the NFL to file a reply brief.

If they do so, that means CA2 won't be dismissing Brady's request out of hand (doesn't mean they won't ultimately dismiss it, though).

Wallach also pointed out that in CA2's most recent en banc they took nine months from when the reply brief was submitted to when they made the decision to grant en banc review.

Click to expand...

Now I might be stating the obvious, but IF in fact Brady manages to get his appeal heard by the full panel of judges, will he then be able to file a motion to stop the suspension until the CA2 files its verdict?

QuantumMechanic said:

Wallach also pointed out that in CA2's most recent en banc they took nine months from when the reply brief was submitted to when they made the decision to grant en banc review.

Click to expand...

Jesus, 9 months? I hope CA2 takes their time with this case too..

patfanken said:

Now I might be stating the obvious, but IF in fact Brady manages to get his appeal heard by the full panel of judges, will he then be able to file a motion to stop the suspension until the CA2 files its verdict?

Click to expand...

Not needed. If CA2 agrees to grant en banc review, the panel decision is automatically wiped off the books (standard federal appellate rules), leaving Berman's decision as the only "live" decision in existence at that point.

Basically, when en banc review is granted, the en banc court steps into the shoes of the panel. It's as if the panel never heard the case in the first place and as if it went straight from Berman to the en banc court.

But what if CA2 asks the NFL for a rebuttal and then waits 9 months, like they did in this other case, before they even decide whether to review it or not? Is there a separate step, in the interim, for the NFLPA and TB12 to have the penalty delayed? If so, is it CA2 who would decide whether or not to grant the stay?

Palm Beach Pats Fan said:

But what if CA2 asks the NFL for a rebuttal and then wait 9 months, like they did in this other case, before they even decide whether to review it or not? Is there a separate step, in the interim, for the NFLPA to have the penalty delayed? If so, is it CA2 who would grant the stay?

Click to expand...

No, there isn't. As I understand it from what Wallach, etc. wrote when NFLPA filed the petition asking for en banc, the act of filing the petition automatically stayed the order of the 3-judge panel and that automatic stay remains in effect until 7 days after the en banc request is denied. (As previously noted, if it is accepted the anti-NFLPA decision is voided so no need to ask for a stay pending the decision of the en banc court on the actual case.)

Ivan said:

Yes.

74 and Quantum could give a more accurate take but imo they wouldn't ask the NFL to take that kind of action if they aren't heading to another hearing. These lawyers rack up big hourly charges and even though the NFL has more money than god the court wouldn't ask them to run up legal fees for no reason.

Click to expand...

I just plain don't know.
I don't think judges worry too much about how much money wealthy clients are paying to lawyers...in fact most of them were lawyers in private practice themselves, so they don't care if the gravy train keeps on rolling along.
All I'll say is that it would not be a bad sign if the court asked the NFL to respond.

QuantumMechanic said:

Oh, you're certainly right about that. Feinberg wants the panel decision wiped out because he thinks that it'll eventually be construed as to bleep over arbitration in general. He's worried (IMHO) the judges aren't thinking that way -- that they're thinking there isn't general applicability because of the uniqueness of the CBA -- but they're wrong about the consequences of their decision. Hence his filing the brief (with no doubt some phone calls from Olson to help ) which (IMHO) he hopes leads them to think "My god, what did we just do?!?"

Click to expand...

from your lips to God's ears...

PatsFanSince74 said:

I never meant to suggest that it was Johnson's ego. Pretty sure it was Kessler's.

As for Johnson's history with one of the judges...that's somewhere between an unverifiable hypothesis and a wild ass guess, dontcha think?

Click to expand...

No more than any other theory put out there.

QuantumMechanic said:

But do they let the MLB Commissioner be the arbitrator? (I honestly don't know, as I give fewer than zero fu**s about baseball.)

Click to expand...

No, there's an appeal process. But look at how broad the initial level is:

Investigations:
The Commissisoner's Office will invesigate all allegations of domestic violence, sexual assault and child abuse involving members of the baseball community. The Commissioner may place an accused player on paid administrative leave for up to seven days while allegations are investigated. Players may challenge any decision before the arbitration panel.

Discipline:
The Commissioner will decide on appropriate discipline, with no minimum or maximum penalty under the policy. Players may challenge such decisions to the arbitration panel.

Click to expand...

MLB, MLBPA agree on domestic violence policy

Allowing for that was nuts.

QuantumMechanic said:

Wallach also pointed out that in CA2's most recent en banc they took nine months from when the reply brief was submitted to when they made the decision to grant en banc review.

Click to expand...

So, hypothetically speaking--say it takes 6 months this time around. That could place Brady in harm's way of missing 4 games come Dec/Jan, couldn't it?

That is probably the NFL's wet dream hope.

supafly said:

So, hypothetically speaking--say it takes 6 months this time around. That could place Brady in harm's way of missing 4 games come Dec/Jan, couldn't it?

That is probably the NFL's wet dream hope.

Click to expand...

Brady missing playoff games because of this might be the one thing that could get Goodell fired.

Deus Irae said:

Brady missing playoff games because of this might be the one thing that could get Goodell fired.

Click to expand...

You really think so? I figure the Other 31 would love to see NE have to play minus Brady in the postseason or miss the postseason altogether because of a missing Brady late in the regular season.

supafly said:

So, hypothetically speaking--say it takes 6 months this time around. That could place Brady in harm's way of missing 4 games come Dec/Jan, couldn't it?

That is probably the NFL's wet dream hope.

Click to expand...

Much as it would suck to lose Brady when it mattered most I have come to terms with it. I believe he will win, and I think this is unlikely, however I believe Brady has earned this right and I support him completely in going for exoneration. No athlete has done more for this region and fan base than Brady and we should be willing to suck it up if he feels it is necessary for his well being and reputation. I'm always going to back him 100% if that costs them a Lombardi that's the way it goes, we still have more shots at it and owe him for the 4 rings.

QuantumMechanic said:

You really think so? I figure the Other 31 would love to see NE have to play minus Brady in the postseason or miss the postseason altogether because of a missing Brady late in the regular season.

Click to expand...

A playoff game without Brady, because of this nonsense, would be a fraud, and even the "full 32" would know that.

QuantumMechanic said:

You really think so? I figure the Other 31 would love to see NE have to play minus Brady in the postseason or miss the postseason altogether because of a missing Brady late in the regular season.

Click to expand...

I have to admit I actually thought the league would never make Brady miss the Thursday night opener last year because of the negative imact on ratings advertising and generally bad publicity but since then it's become pretty clear that this is about the other 31 owners trying to gain a competitive advantage over the Pats. So yeah I think they would actually be pretty happy to see Brady miss the playoffs. I'd even take it a step further and say the league would try to maneuver the penalty to occur at the end of the season if they could.