Brady Second Circuit Judges: Parker, Katzmann, Chin

[JarOfMayo51]

Well, according to Maz, this is VERY bad news for the Pats.

Of course it is

 

[Froob]

If Brady were to somehow lose and serve the suspension, it would mean that CBAs are absolutely meaningless.

 

[Jackson 2]

Well, according to Maz, this is VERY bad news for the Pats.

Did he really say that?

 

[raduray]

I don't believe the owners will let Goodell take this to the Supremes. If they do you can expect a 4-4 split because there is no way the democrats are going to approve a right winger after being stalled for a year. If anything they will simply return the favor and drag it out for another year and reject the first couple of nominees as payback. And that's if a Republican wins in November.

If the NFL takes it to the Supreme Court, it will most probably not get to a vote. The Supremes will refuse to hear the case. I don't think (maybe someone who knows can verify) the CA can refuse to hear appeals.

 

[raduray]

Chin presided over Bernie Madoff's trial. Damn.

Why is this a bad thing?

 

[Gwedd]

As fans we get so immersed in the details of IGL and the league BS and when you come up for air and think about it, it's a total and complete embarrassment that these Federal Judges- who are tasked with interpreting the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights need to preside over THIS?

Its very possible that 4 of the people involved in this case will be considered and potentially nominated for the US Supreme Court.

It's probably like the scene in Rounders with all the judges smoking cigars playing $20 hands of poker, drinking scotch talking about this case....

"Are you kidding me? I don't want to deal with this stupidity!"

"This Goodell guy is a complete idiot. He has no chance."

"If they argue nonsense with me they will wish they hadn't been born."

I'm kinda speechless right now.....

I'm pondering how prescient Coach was when he quoted Mona Lisa Vito. This case has all the halmarks of "My Cousin Vinny", especially watching the DA embarrass himself in front of the judge.

 

[JarOfMayo51]

How did these high-priced attorneys not realize how bad this looks and how potentially damaging it would be to their case later on?

1 word.... Arrogance

Its been all megalomaniacs and narcissists involved in this from the very beginning.. these are the same people that told a federal judge to his face that their obvious partial and bias handling of this entire fiasco was irrelevant

so aggrivating

 

[raduray]

So you have the Chief Judge and two other high-powered, well respected US Federal Court judges that preside over major cases on a daily basis and are one promotion away from the US Supreme Court and now they need to hear a labor law dispute in which it's genesis is born from deflated footballs caused by atmospheric conditions and led by an agenda-driven idiot commissioner and bratty owners.

So f***ing stupid it's embarrassing. I can't even begin to think how other countries around the world perceive this madness.

Even though the trigger was insignificant in the total scheme of things, the principles on which this will be decided are important. Can an arbitrator given broad discretion in a CBA, such as in Article 46 of the NFL CBA, flaunt the rules of fairness required under overarching labor and arbitration laws. This will be a huge defeat for Goodell if the NFL loses. This no longer has anything to do with ball deflation.

 

[raduray]

Over/under on how many times the word integrity is used by the NFL: 65.

46

 

[raduray]

I just re-read Judge Berman's entire decision from start to finish.

1. This ruling is made from the full assumption that Brady is guilty of deflating the balls, and the appellate team is grasping at straws in arguing that Berman asserted himself as an arbitrator of facts and not process. Berman is very careful the entire time not to wander off into that area.

2. Berman acknowledges there are conflicting precedents in several areas, including an arbitrator's power in proceedings on which witnesses are necessary and which documents can be shared. That is, some precedents imply an arbitrator can in fact make a decision to withhold these sources during the arbitration trial while others have vacated awards for that. Berman uses the word "however" a few times, or in other words, this is one where he's picking one of two courses, but another judge might not agree.

3. In my opinion, the areas that were not argued yet, Goodell's impartiality, Goodell's basis for a punishment exceeding the original appeal evidence (a very critical, underlooked area), are very strong in favor of Brady, so if there was a poison pill, this could get even more messy for the NFL.

4. One last thing I just wanted to add. A lot of people believe this case will be decided based on the political affiliations of the appellate judges. It's more complicated than that and in favor of Brady. That presumes that the judges will rule prima facie, or in other words, they will just rule on this case as though Berman never issued a decision initially. If they do not rule prima facie, they are not ruling on the case but on whether or not Berman erred in the judicial process (much like Berman is ruling on Goodell's proceedings only.)

If all the cases were just ruled prima facie with no deference to the original judge's decision, we would probably have a a lot more rulings overturned on appeal. For example, if there's a 50/50 split in Dems and Reps in the courts, and there is no attention paid to the original ruling, you'd see about 50% of the cases overturned, since it would some down only to party lines. The actual numbers are closer to 10%. In other words, conservatives and liberals don't agree on a lot of the rulings, but overturning based on judicial error and just ruling differently are two different things - assuming they don't use prima facie.

5. So, all in all, I think there's a good chance this ruling stands for the following reasons:

-If the judges do not go prima facie and ruling on the judicial decisions rather than just the arguments, there's a very small chance this gets overturned.

-Even if they do use prima facie, at least two of the judges appear to be liberal.

-Berman's initial decision makes it "more likely than not" that Brady's case is stronger; it's more likely his judgement is consistent with other judges than anomalous.

-Berman ruled 3/3 points in favor of overturning when just 1/3 would have sufficed.

-There are still three other grounds for overturning the appeal that were not addressed in Berman's ruling which could still be trouble for the NFL.

Regarding #4, didn't both parties agree to the request that the CA would hear this de novo which implies that they ignore Berman and start anew? Or am I not understanding this correctly?

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

Why is this a bad thing?

I think he meant it as "Damn, now that was a big deal, not this" as opposed to "Damn, that's bad for Brady".

I read it like you initially.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Clement is using this case to raise his profile. If he wins hes a god. If he loses then it was expected.

I'm guessing Clement just sees this as a billing bonanza from a client with more money than brains. He probably knows this case is a dog with fleas and that he's going in to catch a greased javelin. When he loses, "hey, it was a tough case."

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

Regarding #4, didn't both parties agree to the request that the CA would hear this de novo which implies that they ignore Berman and start anew? Or am I not understanding this correctly?

I've heard both sides of that, would love to hear a definitive answer.

 

[juny]

McCann analysis on the three judges
The judges who will decide Deflategate appeal

Should be slightly favorable for Brady is what I get out of it.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

I just re-read Judge Berman's entire decision from start to finish.

1. This ruling is made from the full assumption that Brady is guilty of deflating the balls, and the appellate team is grasping at straws in arguing that Berman asserted himself as an arbitrator of facts and not process. Berman is very careful the entire time not to wander off into that area.

2. Berman acknowledges there are conflicting precedents in several areas, including an arbitrator's power in proceedings on which witnesses are necessary and which documents can be shared. That is, some precedents imply an arbitrator can in fact make a decision to withhold these sources during the arbitration trial while others have vacated awards for that. Berman uses the word "however" a few times, or in other words, this is one where he's picking one of two courses, but another judge might not agree.

3. In my opinion, the areas that were not argued yet, Goodell's impartiality, Goodell's basis for a punishment exceeding the original appeal evidence (a very critical, underlooked area), are very strong in favor of Brady, so if there was a poison pill, this could get even more messy for the NFL.

4. One last thing I just wanted to add. A lot of people believe this case will be decided based on the political affiliations of the appellate judges. It's more complicated than that and in favor of Brady. That presumes that the judges will rule prima facie, or in other words, they will just rule on this case as though Berman never issued a decision initially. If they do not rule prima facie, they are not ruling on the case but on whether or not Berman erred in the judicial process (much like Berman is ruling on Goodell's proceedings only.)

If all the cases were just ruled prima facie with no deference to the original judge's decision, we would probably have a a lot more rulings overturned on appeal. For example, if there's a 50/50 split in Dems and Reps in the courts, and there is no attention paid to the original ruling, you'd see about 50% of the cases overturned, since it would some down only to party lines. The actual numbers are closer to 10%. In other words, conservatives and liberals don't agree on a lot of the rulings, but overturning based on judicial error and just ruling differently are two different things - assuming they don't use prima facie.

5. So, all in all, I think there's a good chance this ruling stands for the following reasons:

-If the judges do not go prima facie and ruling on the judicial decisions rather than just the arguments, there's a very small chance this gets overturned.

-Even if they do use prima facie, at least two of the judges appear to be liberal.

-Berman's initial decision makes it "more likely than not" that Brady's case is stronger; it's more likely his judgement is consistent with other judges than anomalous.

-Berman ruled 3/3 points in favor of overturning when just 1/3 would have sufficed.

-There are still three other grounds for overturning the appeal that were not addressed in Berman's ruling which could still be trouble for the NFL.

I haven't re-read the Berman decision for some time now but the three main points, as I recall, were: (1) lack of notice; (2) refusing to let them question Pash; and (3) denying access to the investigation notes. All adding up to denial of due process.

Of course, I'm biased, but I'm not really seeing any solid logic rebutting any of these points.

 

[OhExaulted1]

Well, according to Maz, this is VERY bad news for the Pats.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Why is this a bad thing?

I meant damn as in he handled THAT case.

 

[XLIX]

More specifically, it is about
Did management provide notice to labor of the consequence of said action
Can an arbitrator deny labor the right to the investigation notes
Can an arbitrator bar labor from examining a witness because arbitrator decided it wasn't worthwhile
Can these decisions be made by the same individual, who is management
Is more likely than not generally aware an accurate legal standard for management to hold labor too
Can management arbitrarily impose larger penalties for the same offense by different individuals (part of notice as well)
Can arbitrator change the standard of guilt in arbitration as a way of escaping the poor standard of generally aware.

These are all clearly issues of management usurping labor rights. I think pro-labor vs pro-management would color 95% of the judgment on every issue in this case.

What you fail to realize is that many of those issues are perfectly reciprocal when viewed outside the context of this case. While it obviously didn't happen here, an arbitrator may also potentially treat management unfairly when it comes to discovery process, examining witnesses, levying punishments (yes, management can be punished for certain things), etc.

In other words, a court making it easier for other courts to overturn an evidently partial arbitrator's decision is not necessarily a pro-labor verdict.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I'm guessing Clement just sees this as a billing bonanza from a client with more money than brains. He probably knows this case is a dog with fleas and that he's going in to catch a greased javelin. When he loses, "hey, it was a tough case."

Yep if this case was a poker hand he's holding a 2 and 9.

 

[Tony2046]

McCann analysis on the three judges
The judges who will decide Deflategate appeal

Should be slightly favorable for Brady is what I get out of it.

That was one hell of a break down.

Bottom line: The track records for these three judges are by no means conclusive. That said, they seem willing to tolerate flawed arbitrators, but only up to a degree. Also, Judges Katzmann and Chin seem willing to uphold district court decisions on arbitration awards. On balance this reflects positive news for Brady, but by no means does it lend assurance that he will win. If next Thursday’s hearing were an NFL game, one might predict a close score with Brady prevailing.