From Florio - Interesting commentary on judicial proceedings

[rochrist]

I don't know this judge very well but NYers for the most part hate Brady and are cheering the punishment. If this judge is part of that landscape it's not a very good sign. If he's not, then he isn't a very big part of the landscape.

I just don't understand how you can make the case that someone being a card carrying typical member of a city populated by the people with the most bias against the Patriots is somehow good for the Patriots.

Pretty sure that, as a class, Federal judges are at least a couple of steps up from the run of the mill NYC denizen. For that matter, it's perfectly possible this guy isn't even a football fan. Not everyone is, you know. Despite what the NFL would have you believe.

 

[raduray]

Interesting -- read Florio's legal analysis and Lester Munson's. It's night and day. One is legal analysis and the other reads like someone who had 10 minutes to get a post out about something he's not studied.

Munson is a disbarred lawyer who cheated his clients. OK, maybe a bit hyperbolic, but not much. Google it.

 

[rochrist]

I know it's assumed, but does the CBA specify a neutral arbitrator?

An arbiter, by definition, is supposed to be neutral.

 

[rochrist]

Everyday someone posts how Florio is an idiot. Why is there now a thread about what he thinks about the court proceedings now that they are here? I know not everyone is alike and everyone has an opinion. It's just funny to see a thread that takes him seriously.

On a side note, isn't it crazy it's almost time for the season? In some ways it doesn't even feel like we won the super bowl which is probably what the haters want. I'm gonna go watch butler intercept that ball on YouTube to remind myself how fn awesome we are

I guess you haven't been following the story very closely.

 

[raduray]

An arbiter, by definition, is supposed to be neutral.

Turns out that the CBA calls for a "hearing officer" for appeals in its section on Commissioner Discipline. Nothing about arbiter, neutral, impartial, etc. Amazing the union agreed to that given that other sections of the CBA are covered by well defined neutral arbitration processes.

 

[TommyD4207]

Munson is a disbarred lawyer who cheated his clients. OK, maybe a bit hyperbolic, but not much. Google it.

It's not hyperbolic if it's the truth.

He was disbarred for stealing money from a client. No hyperbole there.

 

[robbomango]

He's asking the NFL, who just held a comedic SNL level kangaroo court and upheld their own ruling slandering Brady in the process, to make a settlement with team Brady? I'm imaging phone calls ending in "drop dead" and "up yours" from what I've seen so far.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I think Berman thinks this is a ridiculous case, and a waste of his and the courts time. Either the NFL comes to its senses or he will make them do it. All he has to see in court everyday , real crime and injustice and Brady more probably then not going 56 in a 55mph zone is brought to Court by godell ?!!!!

I couldn't have put that any better. This guy has presided over murder cases and major drug trafficking trials as well as terrorist proceedings, the latter with heavily armed guards in full body armor nearby.

However, a lot is going to depend on how the two sides come across in his courtroom, but he's really not going to have any patience with preening on either side.

He's already told them to work it out.

If they can't, I put it at 60--40 that he vacates Goodell's findings and orders them to find an independent arbiter acceptable to both parties and the court. But, he could also let the original findings stand, which is the more common practice.

Both sides are taking some risk in not settling, but I think the risk to the NFL is slightly higher, as an independent arbiter will trash the Wells report.

 

[eom]

Turns out that the CBA calls for a "hearing officer" for appeals in its section on Commissioner Discipline. Nothing about arbiter, neutral, impartial, etc. Amazing the union agreed to that given that other sections of the CBA are covered by well defined neutral arbitration processes.

the union gave in cuz nfl basically said that process wasn't on the table, so union spun it to the membership that it only affects a handful, and won't affect them at all if they stay out of trouble.
that way they don't have to fight hard, and can just collect $.
d smith is under no danger of getting arbitrarily suspended, so he just sells the $ to his members and 98% of the players hop on it like frogs.

I remember some player talking about the misgivings he had in these meetings.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

i'm from NY. does that automatically put me in the anti-brady category ?

No, but I didn't say that so what's your point?

 

[PatsFanSince74]

i'm from NY. does that automatically put me in the anti-brady category ?

Me too. I'm up for Jury Duty this month and was kind of hoping to get tagged for this if it had gone to trial that fast and was wondering how I could get on the Jury without perjuring myself when asked if I were a Patriots fan...

 

[Hoodie]

Could this be why the NFL is so insistent on an admission of guilt? I'm no lawyer, but I have to think a public admission of guilt would pretty much eliminate any chance of filing and winning a defamation suit.

I wonder what Brady would do if the NFL said "we will eliminate all punishment, no suspension, no fines, but you have to admit guilt."

I honestly think Brady would refuse that deal on principle.

The NFL needs an admission of guilt to prove that the past 6 months haven't a complete waste of time and money. IMHO, they deserve no such thing.

 

[upstater1]

Goodell's argument at its base is that this is a concern with the rules of the game, entertainment product, and so has nothing to do with punishment of behavior. He simply doesn't see this as having anything to do with labor law. That's why he thinks he can wear all the hats.

 

[eom]

Goodell's argument at its base is that this is a concern with the rules of the game, entertainment product, and so has nothing to do with punishment of behavior. He simply doesn't see this as having anything to do with labor law. That's why he thinks he can wear all the hats.

of course it involves labor law, and I'm sure he's aware of that.
or, even if he wasn't, that's what pash is there for.

I'm also sure he doesn't give 2 craps about labor law and thinks, along with pash, that he can steamroll the issue.

Mr. Boland has followed Mr. Pash's career in the league. "I've listened to him speak and paid attention for a 17-, 18-year period. He has been the most aggressive legal lead the NFL has ever had," Mr. Boland said. "Where [former NFL Commissioner] Paul Tagliabue preferred to settle things, Pash has largely preferred to litigate."

http://adage.com/article/special-re...ash-general-counsel-exec-vp-labor-nfl/147922/

 

[Hoodie]

I don't know this judge very well but NYers for the most part hate Brady and are cheering the punishment. If this judge is part of that landscape it's not a very good sign. If he's not, then he isn't a very big part of the landscape.

I just don't understand how you can make the case that someone being a card carrying typical member of a city populated by the people with the most bias against the Patriots is somehow good for the Patriots.

Call me idealistic but I've got to think that any federal judge would put setting good legal precedent above whatever football team they root for.

 

[Canuck]

I believe Brady will accept some kind of negotiated settlement as long as there is no admission of guilt included. Most likely Brady will try to negotiate a fine but someone suggested (I forgot where) that he might be willing to accept a suspension as long as there was no admission of guilt and he got to pick the games to sit out. The NFL has to accept that they will not get an admission of guilt or an apology to get the settlement done or the court case goes to the Judge to decide.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

Call me idealistic but I've got to think that any federal judge would put setting good legal precedent above whatever football team they root for.

And I'm sure Goodell would say that's exactly what he did, put the law first without regard to interests. And I'm sure he believes that.

 

[Fencer]

Florio is right. The Judge will force a settlement.

Neither side will be happy with the outcome

There's a core concept in negotiation called the "threat point", which is what happens if the parties don't agree. It looks like the answer to that is:

• The judge rules that the penalties were ridiculous, and should be reduced to nothing more than a wrist slap.
• The league staunchly maintains its opinion that Brady cheated. (The NFLPA filings did very little to undermine their blanket right to make findings of fact.)
• Brady's only further legal recourse about the reputational issues as an expensive and disruptive defamation suit.

So I expect the settlement negotiations to mainly be about:

• How light of a wrist-slap.
• Whether Brady admits any wrongdoing in noncooperation (I hope he stays totally firm on that as a favor to the NFLPA, even though I believe the reports that he was willing to waver on that to settle pre-court-case).
• Whether Brady signs away his rights to a defamation suit.

If I were Brady, I'd agree to mutually signing away the rights to a defamation suit. I'd insist on a special exemption from fines for cold-shouldering certain named media members, which I expect the NFL would smile and grant. Then, between the handshake and the actual signing, I'd hold a press conference in which:

• I explained the agreement.
• I absolutely blasted the NFL, calling them collectively a bunch of dishonest, vindictive, corrupt lying cheaters.
  
• I carefully avoiding defaming any particular NFL person by name, because their right to sue me probably is not covered by the settlement agreement.
• I said I'd only take questions or further discuss this publicly on very limited occasions, which my representatives would announce. (One, for example, would be a conference call with the beat writers for all 13 teams the Pats will play this season. I'd take questions on that call, but not then again the week of the game.)

I.e., I'd hit back, hard, to have that be reported in the same news cycle as the settlement offer is. Then I'd get rid of the distraction as fast as possible, recognizing that "as fast as possible" hardly equates to "overnight".

Alternatively, if the final settlement does NOT include a promise not to file a defamation suit, I'd:

• Refuse to comment on any settlement until after it was signed, because a deal isn't final until it's final.
• I'd have my representatives file a defamation suit half an hour after the settlement is signed.

Have fun, NFL, with those two events being combined in the same news cycle.

Oh yeah -- I'd publicly offer to settle the defamation suit for an apology to me, a cancellation of the Pats' penalties, and a $1 million donation to whichever charitable organization would have benefited from the Patriots' fine.

 

[reflexblue]

Me too. I'm up for Jury Duty this month and was kind of hoping to get tagged for this if it had gone to trial that fast and was wondering how I could get on the Jury without perjuring myself when asked if I were a Patriots fan...

Well first off don't wear a patriots hat, or shirt. You'd most likely get contempt of court right off the bat.

 

[fair catch fryar]

Florio is right. The Judge will force a settlement.

Neither side will be happy with the outcome

Then why settle? Besides, I don't think the judge can "force" them to settle anything, can he?