NFLPA files motion to vacate

[AllstonPatsFan]

IANAL, but I have studied estoppel (since I once worked a field where the concept mattered).

Estoppel is a principle that limits the ability to file cases. Collateral estoppel is specifically the idea that you can't relitigate an issue that has already been decided. As others have noted, in this specific case, it means that because the NFL has already litigated the issue of notices with the NFLPA (and lost), it may not be possible for them to re-litigate it, although I believe that the NFL could overcome this by arguing that this is somehow fundamentally different.

It also applies here on the grounds that if someone in an official capacity makes a statement on which you rely, you can hold them responsible for it. For example, if an insurance agent claims that a policy covers X, when in fact it doesn't, the insurance company can be held responsible if X happens. Hmmm, I wonder where that happened here.

That second example is promissory estoppel. It's not going to apply here.

 

[Rob0729]

LOL! Andrew Brandt is doing the NFL's argument. Looks like the NFL is conceding that Wells was not an independent investigator because they are arguing according to rule 46 they are not required to use an independent investigator. I wonder if the media will pick this up.

 

[Mack Herron]

Ok I still don't fully understand this....
I'm judging by responses this is good for Brady.....but how good?

Only one opinion counts, and he hasn't ruled.

 

[ChoWZa]

Daniel Wallach@WALLACHLEGAL
Wells testimony: “I want to be clear--I did not tell Brady at any time he would be subject to punishment for not turning over his cellphone"

Wow this surprised me. I thought for sure he'd perjure himself.

 

[Patriot Missile]

It's only good if Berman agrees that's it's the same parties litigating the exact same issue. NFL will likely argue the issue is different somehow.

But he broke the phone we didn't ask for

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Can legal eagles explain why this is a "Wow"

Basically says the NFL cannot make any counterarguments to the "no notice" argument of the NFLPA because of the Adrian Peterson ruling on same notice issue.

 

[Mack Herron]

LOL! Andrew Brandt is doing the NFL's argument. Looks like the NFL is conceding that Wells was not an independent investigator because they are arguing according to rule 46 they are not required to use an independent investigator. I wonder if the media will pick this up.

Matt Chatham ‏@chatham58 6m6 minutes ago

Matt Chatham retweeted Andrew Brandt

Hahaha...so NOW he admits they weren't independent. "Integrity." Agreed tho - not required. He didn't need that lie

 

[raduray]

Michael McCann@McCannSportsLaw
Tonight's filings by Brady & NFL mostly rehash prior arguments, but Brady directly links Goodell to bias by Ted Wells' lack of independence.

Michael McCann@McCannSportsLaw
If NFL loses to Tom Brady, chances are it won't have to do with PSI or even Brady but rather making mockery of "independent" investigations.

 

[AllstonPatsFan]

Can you explain it to me?

A few people here explained it well. Its just a legal principle that you can't relitigate the same issue between the same parties. The NFL lost the notice issue in previous cases and thus may be estopped from relitigating.

A brilliant argument by Kessler - just have to see if Berman agrees.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

From the NFL point of view, it's in their best interest at this point that the Judge Berman vacates the suspension. I believe the NFL knows this. Brady not playing at this point would look terrible for them. They also have too much ego to vacate the suspension themselves. The NFL just needed (in their eyes) to make an aggressive attempt to destroy Brady's reputation which they've done and made everyone happy. They don't care if he actually serves the suspension just that everyone perceives them as trying everything they could to get it to stick. If they stayed inside the lines (not lying about Brady's testimony, leaking false information, etc) then the best outcome for them would be the suspension be upheld. I think it's a win/win for the NFL if it's vacated by the judge, everyone will still be happy about the draft picks.

It's all really disgusting.

I think you underestimate the NFL's level of self delusion. They are really sure Brady dun it, and will be shocked if they don't win.

 

[SVN]

So what is new today ? I thought settlement meetings were on 12th and 19th ? Can someone explain what happened today ? Sorry about my ignorance. Everytime something gets released I hold my breath as what other crap NFL is spreading.

 

[reflexblue]

In fact there is hearing on contempt of court against goodell August 13th with Doty presiding.

WOW, Roger has a busy schedule this week.

 

[AllstonPatsFan]

Daniel Wallach@WALLACHLEGAL
Wells testimony: “I want to be clear--I did not tell Brady at any time he would be subject to punishment for not turning over his cellphone"

Pretty amazing when you consider Goodell's argument for upholding the decision. Stunning really - and hopefully arbitrary and capricious.

 

[SVN]

Matt Chatham ‏@chatham58 16m16 minutes ago
Matt Chatham retweeted Andrew Brandt

Hahaha...so NOW he admits they weren't independent. "Integrity." Agreed tho - not required. He didn't need that lie

Matt Chatham added,

Andrew Brandt @adbrandt
Re Wells' bias, NFL: Article 46 does not require an “independent” investigation, commonplace for NFL personnel other to investigate conduct"

I mean what is the NFL thinking ?

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Michael McCann@McCannSportsLaw
Tonight's filings by Brady & NFL mostly rehash prior arguments, but Brady directly links Goodell to bias by Ted Wells' lack of independence.

Michael McCann@McCannSportsLaw
If NFL loses to Tom Brady, chances are it won't have to do with PSI or even Brady but rather making mockery of "independent" investigations.

If Brady wins, I hope it's BOTH on the procedural issues AND the PSI claim.

 

[reflexblue]

I think you underestimate the NFL's level of self delusion. They are really sure Brady dun it, and will be shocked if they don't win.

I think they know brady did no wrong, they're just so arrogant they're going through with this anyways.

 

[Ross12]

That is my understanding.

BTW, I don't know if you know this, but you are a celebrity. You made it to Stephanie Stradley's Twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/StephStradley/status/629670856847835136

Thanks for letting me know, but @Wheelman let me know earlier today. I was feeling rather good about it so I created a whole thread for it:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...h-stradley-thinks-im-funny-and-weird.1122069/

 

[Deus Irae]

For those who are wondering:

The estoppel claim is (a big part of) why the NFLPA wanted this case in Minnesota.

 

[SVN]

LOL! Andrew Brandt is doing the NFL's argument. Looks like the NFL is conceding that Wells was not an independent investigator because they are arguing according to rule 46 they are not required to use an independent investigator. I wonder if the media will pick this up.

So how does the judge use that in his ruling ? He can say nfl said independent but he wasnt but is that enough to score pts to win ?

 

[XLIX]

Just a layman, but here are my interpretations of the filings:

NFL: The Commissioner can do whatever he wants because that's what the CBA says. (This is actually a strong argument, I am not trying to minimize its impact)

NFLPA: The rules in place and precedents clearly call for fines at most. You can't just pull things out of your hind quarters like the Commissioner is doing. Oh by the way, the entire process determining he was guilty in the first place was a total clusterbleep.