Robert Blecker's Amicus Curiae Brief on behalf of NFLPA/Brady

JJDChE said:

Unless the Patriots signed documents releasing claim to further legal action, I assume they can sue to get their draft picks and money back, considering significant new evidence has come to light. It's really a travesty that they lost draft picks and and were given an exorbitant fine for doing absolutely nothing.

Click to expand...

That's what you get, not once but every single time from Bobby "Vichy" Kraft

betterthanthealternative said:

I just see it differently. The Pats are in an agreement with the League that League financial interests trump the local team interests; that's the premise on which the League is set up. As far as I can see, no one has specifically identified financial damage to the Pats as a result of League actions. Even more importantly, the current case before the courts has nothing to do with any of that. It is about Brady's rights to play. It isn't about Patriots vs. NFL.

And the draft picks all belong to the NFL and are awarded based on a formula created by the NFL central office, which apparently the Commissioner has free reign to modify based on his judgment at any time. That's the contractual arrangement.

Click to expand...

I believe you are misrepresenting the agreement the league has with the franchises, but it doesn't really matter. If it's shown that the actions of the Commissioner, or his agents, were negligent or fraudulent it's really just a matter of procedure to shown the Patriots and Bob Kraft have been materially affected. Beyond the million dollar fine of course, which has obvious value. Draft picks don't have set monetary value, but you can quite easily show a they have monetary value to a team.

Also, draft picks do not 'belong' to the NFL. The NFL may hold jurisdiction over the draft picks, but the position and the value they hold is owned by the franchises. As part of the agreement, the value of the draft picks is divided evenly between the franchises. If the league changes the distribution of that value under false pretenses the agreement between the franchise and league has been breached.

Again, perfect situation for legal intervention.

betterthanthealternative said:

I just see it differently. The Pats are in an agreement with the League that League financial interests trump the local team interests; that's the premise on which the League is set up. As far as I can see, no one has specifically identified financial damage to the Pats as a result of League actions. Even more importantly, the current case before the courts has nothing to do with any of that. It is about Brady's rights to play. It isn't about Patriots vs. NFL.

And the draft picks all belong to the NFL and are awarded based on a formula created by the NFL central office, which apparently the Commissioner has free reign to modify based on his judgment at any time. That's the contractual arrangement.

Click to expand...

Strongly disagree on a few points:

1) the League is not set up on the premise that its financial interests trump the local team's interests. Each franchise exists on its own, but they've entered into an agreement such that they "pay" certain rights in exchange for other benefits. The Patriots "pay" the league some potential earnings (local tv rights) in exchange for the brand name NFL and a more predictable earnings stream. The Patriots could just go Harlem Globetrotters; but it's in their financial benefit to be part of a League.

2) The draft picks don't belong to the NFL anymore than the shake mixer at your local McDonald's belongs to McDonald's corporate. The Patriots as their own professional football club have the legal right to sign whoever the hell they want to their team. However, they "sold" that right to the NFL in exchange for draft picks and other benefits they believe help the team more. If the NFL fraudulently took away those draft picks, the Pats have every damn right to sue the NFL for fraud and breach of contract. Of course, they won't, but you know that Al Davis sure would have. The agreement with the NFL is spelled out - commissioner is supposed to be of unquestioned integrity and is supposed to follow a fair process. If the process was fair and the Commish weren't Herr Goodell, then the Patriots probably don't have a case. That sure as heck isn't the case here.

I'd like to think things can be re-opened on the draft picks now that the fraud has been "revealed". Not sure how the process would work, but "fraud unravels everything".

Edit: I see Thor was thinking something along the same lines.

I'm not sure Kraft would do it, but there is legal grounds. Without question.

memento said:

Doesn't the de novo standard try the case again with the appellate judges looking at the case anew?

Click to expand...

No. In this context de novo simply means that little or no deference will be given to Berman's interpretations of facts and law. In other words, rather than starting by assuming Berman is correct and only reversing him if they find mistakes, the appellate court is going to come up with its own from-scratch interpretations of the facts and law (though I imagine it'll still be giving some consideration to what Berman said). It is definitely not going to re-try the case in any way.

JJDChE said:

I'm not sure Kraft would do it, but there is legal grounds. Without question.

Click to expand...

He won't. All the old man wants to do is make money, hang out with women 2/5 of his age and be accepted as one of the power broker owners of the NFL.

JJDChE said:

I believe you are misrepresenting the agreement the league has with the franchises, but it doesn't really matter. If it's shown that the actions of the Commissioner, or his agents, were negligent or fraudulent it's really just a matter of procedure to shown the Patriots and Bob Kraft have been materially affected. Beyond the million dollar fine of course, which has obvious value. Draft picks don't have set monetary value, but you can quite easily show a they have monetary value to a team.

Also, draft picks do not 'belong' to the NFL. The NFL may hold jurisdiction over the draft picks, but the position and the value they hold is owned by the franchises. As part of the agreement, the value of the draft picks is divided evenly between the franchises. If the league changes the distribution of that value under false pretenses the agreement between the franchise and league has been breached.

Again, perfect situation for legal intervention.

Click to expand...

Hammer of Thor said:

Strongly disagree on a few points:

1) the League is not set up on the premise that its financial interests trump the local team's interests. Each franchise exists on its own, but they've entered into an agreement such that they "pay" certain rights in exchange for other benefits. The Patriots "pay" the league some potential earnings (local tv rights) in exchange for the brand name NFL and a more predictable earnings stream. The Patriots could just go Harlem Globetrotters; but it's in their financial benefit to be part of a League.

2) The draft picks don't belong to the NFL anymore than the shake mixer at your local McDonald's belongs to McDonald's corporate. The Patriots as their own professional football club have the legal right to sign whoever the hell they want to their team. However, they "sold" that right to the NFL in exchange for draft picks and other benefits they believe help the team more. If the NFL fraudulently took away those draft picks, the Pats have every damn right to sue the NFL for fraud and breach of contract. Of course, they won't, but you know that Al Davis sure would have. The agreement with the NFL is spelled out - commissioner is supposed to be of unquestioned integrity and is supposed to follow a fair process. If the process was fair and the Commish weren't Herr Goodell, then the Patriots probably don't have a case. That sure as heck isn't the case here.

Click to expand...

I'd like it be the way you guys outline it, but I think it is simply wishful thinking.

On top of that, there isn't any motivation I can see that would cause Kraft to want to sue his partners in the business they run together (the NFL), on which his private business (The Patriots) is entirely dependent on for any business viability and success. He might tussle with them on the outcome of this situation, but a lawsuit would indicate a relationship that just doesn't exist.

JJDChE said:

I believe you are misrepresenting the agreement the league has with the franchises, but it doesn't really matter. If it's shown that the actions of the Commissioner, or his agents, were negligent or fraudulent it's really just a matter of procedure to shown the Patriots and Bob Kraft have been materially affected. Beyond the million dollar fine of course, which has obvious value. Draft picks don't have set monetary value, but you can quite easily show a they have monetary value to a team.

Also, draft picks do not 'belong' to the NFL. The NFL may hold jurisdiction over the draft picks, but the position and the value they hold is owned by the franchises. As part of the agreement, the value of the draft picks is divided evenly between the franchises. If the league changes the distribution of that value under false pretenses the agreement between the franchise and league has been breached.

Again, perfect situation for legal intervention.

Click to expand...

This is all well and good but if Bob Kraft doesn't grow a set and threaten his fellow owners with a law suit, nothing will happen.

I will give my right nut to have the ability to write like that. Cogent and piercing.

Tuck said:

This is all well and good but if Bob Kraft doesn't grow a set and threaten his fellow owners with a law suit, nothing will happen.

Click to expand...

Agree.

However, in my dream, Kraft holds a press conference on the draft stage 10 minutes before start and announces the Patriots are announcing their #1 pick either in the normal process (at 32 of course ) or independently outside the Event center. Further that the Patriots will not only sue any other team that tries to claim their pick, but also that pick if he tries to report and sign with any other Team than the Pats.

Pats may not be allowed by agreement to sue Nfl, but i think sueing other teams is not excluded

betterthanthealternative said:

This defines the relationship between the NFL owners and the NFLPA; it is one of partners who at times have an argument. But they are partners above all else, in the pursuit of one thing: revenue from NFL assets.

It isn't in the best interest of the NFLPA to do damage to the brand of the NFL; in dong so, the NFLPA damages its #1 asset, which is total revenue.

Click to expand...

Yep. This is what I was about to say.

Gumby said:

Pats may not be allowed by agreement to sue Nfl, but i think sueing other teams is not excluded

Click to expand...

Not correct. Teams have agreed to neither sue the league nor each either.

PatsWickedPissah said:

EPIC read.
Never been a fan of the defamation suite route but repeated public allegations of deliberate fraud certainly adds fuel to that fire. Given the science and their selective acceptance of the Ref's testimony how could the NYJFL not know that they were purposely dead wrong? Their only recourse, plead obdurate uncorrectable stupidity.

Click to expand...

Well its about freakin' time you came to this realization. PWP. Former prosecutors don't throw the word FRAUD around in a legal brief to an appellate court lightly, yet this guy mentions it SEVERAL times just in the sections presented in this thread.

BTW- Fraud is a felony

As stated in the video below, Blecker *hates* the Patriots and wishes that they did cheat!

I love you Robert Blecker

QuantumMechanic said:

Not correct. Teams have agreed to neither sue the league nor each either.

Click to expand...

IANAL but thought no suit agreement would not hold up where fraud or willful misconduct are alleged.

QuantumMechanic said:

Not correct. Teams have agreed to neither sue the league nor each either.

Click to expand...

Ok, but i can still sue the draftee. Any way that makes go-to-hell look freakin impotent works for me.
-- Sueing the draftee maybe works even better at the ultimate objective of making roger look silly and getting other owners to finally say we have to get rid of him and stop the bleeding.

Regardless, this whole namby-pamby 'agreed not to sue' argument is a smokescreen gutless excuse for inaction.

-- You CANNOT give up all rights to sue for ALL future unknowable events. Fundamentally untrue and illogical. All that agreement does is raise the bar up to a higher level that eliminates frivolous, petty, and minor suits.
--A suit based on outright fraud ( hello, Roger we're calling you out here) should IMO be very unlikely to receive an outright dismissal from the courts (which can obviously go on a personality basis in almost any direction).

patfanken said:

Well its about freakin' time you came to this realization. PWP. Former prosecutors don't throw the word FRAUD around in a legal brief to an appellate court lightly, yet this guy mentions it SEVERAL times just in the sections presented in this thread.

BTW- Fraud is a felony

Click to expand...

Beautiful Point.

Can we please send this to the MA, RI, NH,VT,ME,CT, and NY attorney generals, (clearly identify the CF to the others) with a note that says the first one to file a fraud case will be on every channel for weeks getting free publicity against one of the most hated men in America (can you say next state Gov)

Some comments on the comments:

1. FINALLY the truth of the fraud the cabal at 354 Park Ave perpetrated has been laid bare, and the and what the NFL did is finally labeled what it is......a FRAUD. The appellate court case was all about procedures and the technicalities of labor law. The very fact that Berman even got into the basic truth about the initial allegations only proves just how malicious this prosecution actually was to start with,

2. Here is what has me tearing my hair out right now. This report came to light yesterday or the day before, right? Well then how come I spent the better part of my time in the care yesterday listening to our local mediots talking about Donald Trump?!!!!!!! (BTW- did any of them bother to talk about the brief today? I don;t know since I haven't been listening)

For almost a full year we had to listen to even the best of them talk about this subject like they they were walking on egg shells, some times supportive but always with the prerequisite qualifiers of "what Brady might have done", or "of course we don't know for certain whether he's guilty or innocent".

Well Blecher's brief should end ANY question of Brady's innocence, and lays bare the fraud the cabal at 354 Park Ave. have perpetrated on the Pats, Brady, and the general public. This should have been the lead story on every news show in the Metro Boston area. Has BSPN even mentioned it? Probably not? When can we expect it to be a topic on First Take? Probably not.

3. This brief gave the basic outline for an easily winnable defamation suit for even a half assed lawyer. Plus remember this brief is based solely on the information in the Welles Report. Image how much better it would be after going through the discovery process and deposing the likes of Kessil, Mort, Pash, and Goodell, as well as a slew of BSPN producers and all their emails and communications.

4 BTW- I would put the producers of the show Robot Man as exhibit A of the damage that was done, and show that opening clip that was seen by millions which portrayed Brady as a liar and cheater on the same level as Lance Armstron, and Richard Nixon.

5. Right now my biggest fear is 2 fold. One that Pats fans will let this great opportunity go away in the name of exhaustion, and 2, Brady will not pursue the defamation case, and the the league and their minions will be allowed to get away with this gross miscarriage of justice.

6. Blecher's brief SHOULD be the jumping off point of a PR campaign to get our draft picks back. While I doubt there are any legal or procedural grounds for the organization to get them back, every effort should be made to literally embarrass the league into returning the picks.

There his clear and compelling evidence that not only didn't Brady and the Pats do any of the things the NFL said they did, the league conspired to withhold exculpatory evidence and continue a fraud to damage the team with the suspension of their QB and removal of 2 draft picks.

To get them back the Pats will need to oil up their PR machine and make sure this narrative is spread across the sports media. "Why are the Pats losing their draft picks" SHOULD be a question that demands answers by the league. No opportunity should be missed to ask Goodell that question. He should never be allowed to speak at a public occasion WITHOUT having to answer that question.

If they do it well, they will create a groundswell of demand for justice to be done, and if they don't return the picks the league should be positioned as being a mean, petty and vindictive group who is unjustly trying to create an unlevel playing field and thus critically damaging the "integrity of the league".