Sports Law Blog: Brady has another "home field" advantage in NY

[PatsWSB47]

Thanks for the thoughful post but I'm confused.

You stated that the NFLPA is arguing solely on the basis of the arbitration record.

Based on their outline, it seems that NFLPA are challenging a number of circumstances surrounding the punishment.

• The NFL had no policy that applied to players;
• The NFL provided no notice of any such policy or potential discipline to players;
• The NFL resorted to a nebulous standard of "general awareness" to predicate a legally unjustified punishment;
• The NFL had no procedures in place until two days ago to test air pressure in footballs; and
• The NFL violated the plain meaning of the collective bargaining agreement.
• The fact that the NFL would resort to basing a suspension on a smoke screen of irrelevant text messages instead of admitting that they have all of the phone records they asked for is a new low, even for them, but it does nothing to correct their errors.

Thoughts?

that's what confused me. It sounds like he's saying that all that stuff won't be considered. Is that right?

 

[RobertWeathers]

that's what confused me. It sounds like he's saying that all that stuff won't be considered. Is that right?

Don't know. I'm not a lawyer. I'm looking to get educated.

My understanding was that essentially Goody is operating out of process defined in the CBA. Maybe in lawyerspeak he implies that all of the NFLPA's issues are encompassed in the single issue of arbitration record.

 

[raduray]

Berman just ruled that the documents will not be under seal. The NFL wanted to keep the Gooddell appeal hearing transcript secret and the judge said NO.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...s-nfl-nflpa-to-not-file-documents-under-seal/

 

[raduray]

If Judge Doty holds Goodell in contempt in the Peterson case on 8/13, does that damage Goodell in this case?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Berman just ruled that the documents will not be under seal. The NFL wanted to keep the Gooddell appeal hearing transcript secret and the judge said NO.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...s-nfl-nflpa-to-not-file-documents-under-seal/

I heard that as well.

Although the article implied that the NFLPA wanted something sealed. Brady's phone records?

 

[XLIX]

If Judge Doty holds Goodell in contempt in the Peterson case on 8/13, does that damage Goodell in this case?

I can't help but think Kessler should "accidentally" mention that in court. Something like: "Thank you, Your Honor, for scheduling our first conference on the 12th so that it does not interfere with Commissioner Goodell's <cough> CONTEMPT OF COURT HEARING <cough><cough>"

 

[Kdo5]

Well if the appeal hearing was, in Kessler's words, the equivalent of a kangaroo court I am sure the NFL does not want it public. As for Brady who knows. I'd like to assume there is no reason to be concerned about it.

 

[RobertWeathers]

If Judge Doty holds Goodell in contempt in the Peterson case on 8/13, does that damage Goodell in this case?

That is a great question. I'm not sure.

However these two paragraphs stuck out .

The NFL Players Association wants the NFL, its management council and Commissioner Roger Goodell held in contempt of court over the league's refusal to have an arbitrator issue a new ruling on Adrian Peterson's since-lifted suspension, as ordered months ago by a federal judge.

Citing a letter from league counsel Daniel Nash, the union also says “the NFL has implored Mr. Henderson to make the same hypothetical ruling in the event he ever issues a new arbitral award” despite Doty’s ruling that Henderson exceeded his authority.

In essence, the NFLPA's assertion is that league is influencing an arbitrator's actions as they pertain to player discipline. In this case did not act on Doty's decision.

If we are to suppose for a moment that Goody was acting in good faith, he exceeded his authority as he is heavily influenced by the league and the Wells Report was doctored by Pash, how could he have judged fairly?

A sitting commissioner of a $10B sports dynasty held in contempt of court....wow.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...l-conduct-eighth-circuit-david-doty/27604943/

 

[JMC00]

If Judge Doty holds Goodell in contempt in the Peterson case on 8/13, does that damage Goodell in this case?

I mean I doubt it would have any major effect on this case. But it's definitely a huge hit perception wise to him and the nflpa could use it as an example of goodell tactics that undermine the CBA.

 

[Mr. Objective]

Thanks for the thoughful post but I'm confused.

You stated that the NFLPA is arguing solely on the basis of the arbitration record.

Based on their outline, it seems that NFLPA are challenging a number of circumstances surrounding the punishment.

• The NFL had no policy that applied to players;
• The NFL provided no notice of any such policy or potential discipline to players;
• The NFL resorted to a nebulous standard of "general awareness" to predicate a legally unjustified punishment;
• The NFL had no procedures in place until two days ago to test air pressure in footballs; and
• The NFL violated the plain meaning of the collective bargaining agreement.
• The fact that the NFL would resort to basing a suspension on a smoke screen of irrelevant text messages instead of admitting that they have all of the phone records they asked for is a new low, even for them, but it does nothing to correct their errors.

Thoughts?

Hi. I’m going by the NFLPA and NFL’s joint letter to Judge Berman, which states on page 2 that “[n]o discovery is needed to adjudicate the parties’ motions, which will be based on the arbitration record.” I suppose it’s possible that some of the things I mentioned that indicate arbitrator bias—like the failure of the NFL to correct the Mortenson report—could have been brought up at the arbitration hearing. But I’d be surprised if the NFLPA spent much time at the hearing presenting evidence to Goodell that he was biased.

I haven’t looked at the NFLPA’s outline. I’ll do so. However, the things you cite are contract interpretation issues for which an arbitrator is given great latitude by a reviewing court. It’s not enough to show that the arbitrator was wrong; rather, you must, in effect, demonstrate that the arbitrator wasn’t even really trying to interpret the collective bargaining agreement. That’s why people like Lester Munson gave the NFLPA less than one chance in a hundred to get Brady’s suspension in court overturned. What they were ignoring was the elephant in the room of Goodell’s bias, which cuts across the whole issue of contract interpretation.

By the way, if you respond to this comment and I don’t get back to you immediately, it’s because I’m busy doing something else, not because I’m ignoring you.

 

[raduray]

Hi. I’m going by the NFLPA and NFL’s joint letter to Judge Berman, which states on page 2 that “[n]o discovery is needed to adjudicate the parties’ motions, which will be based on the arbitration record.” I suppose it’s possible that some of the things I mentioned that indicate arbitrator bias—like the failure of the NFL to correct the Mortenson report—could have been brought up at the arbitration hearing. But I’d be surprised if the NFLPA spent much time at the hearing presenting evidence to Goodell that he was biased.

I haven’t looked at the NFLPA’s outline. I’ll do so. However, the things you cite are contract interpretation issues for which an arbitrator is given great latitude by a reviewing court. It’s not enough to show that the arbitrator was wrong; rather, you must, in effect, demonstrate that the arbitrator wasn’t even really trying to interpret the collective bargaining agreement. That’s why people like Lester Munson gave the NFLPA less than one chance in a hundred to get Brady’s suspension in court overturned. What they were ignoring was the elephant in the room of Goodell’s bias, which cuts across the whole issue of contract interpretation.

By the way, if you respond to this comment and I don’t get back to you immediately, it’s because I’m busy doing something else, not because I’m ignoring you.

Actually, I would think the NFLPA would want to populate the transcript with as much evidence of Goodell's bias as possible, with an eye toward the appeal. We'll find out soon as it's reported the NFLPA has submitted its preliminary filing including the appeal transcript.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Hi. I’m going by the NFLPA and NFL’s joint letter to Judge Berman, which states on page 2 that “[n]o discovery is needed to adjudicate the parties’ motions, which will be based on the arbitration record.” I suppose it’s possible that some of the things I mentioned that indicate arbitrator bias—like the failure of the NFL to correct the Mortenson report—could have been brought up at the arbitration hearing. But I’d be surprised if the NFLPA spent much time at the hearing presenting evidence to Goodell that he was biased.

I haven’t looked at the NFLPA’s outline. I’ll do so. However, the things you cite are contract interpretation issues for which an arbitrator is given great latitude by a reviewing court. It’s not enough to show that the arbitrator was wrong; rather, you must, in effect, demonstrate that the arbitrator wasn’t even really trying to interpret the collective bargaining agreement. That’s why people like Lester Munson gave the NFLPA less than one chance in a hundred to get Brady’s suspension in court overturned. What they were ignoring was the elephant in the room of Goodell’s bias, which cuts across the whole issue of contract interpretation.

By the way, if you respond to this comment and I don’t get back to you immediately, it’s because I’m busy doing something else, not because I’m ignoring you.

No worries. Good to have quality insights on this board.

 

[MassPats38]

By agreeing with the NFL to have the case decided on the basis of the arbitration record alone, however, the NFLPA has traded away much of its ability to establish arbitrator bias.

What in the docket suggests this to be the true?

Cross-petitions have been filed by the respective parties. The judge set a tentative scheduling order, that will be revised in a magistrate conference if necessary. Nothing precludes the filing of a motion for evidentiary hearing on the question of bias or any other topic that I can see.

Maybe I am missing something that you have seen on the docket.

[Saw your post on the letter, Objective. But life can change quickly in these cases, so let's see what happens in the conference before you get too disappointed. Separately, all of that appears contingent on the Judge issuing his decision by September 4th. Federal judges do not often do advance notice of decision dates. Too many things can go wrong with that.].

 

[rochrist]

In Peterson, the venue was Minnesota. In Bountygate, the venue was Louisiana.

Here, the venue SHOULD have been MA; instead we got NY where they're far less likely to give a sh*t about doing the right thing.

I think there's a fair chance you're overestimating the importance of professional football and underestimating the importance of law in the life of a federal judge, particularly one in NY appointed by Clinton.