PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Jets STH sues Patriots, Belichick for $184M


Status
Not open for further replies.
This is such a joke.....I would really be ashamed if I was jets fan....
 
Ok, here we go:

2007 rule changes: http://www.giants.com/news/press_releases/story.asp?story_id=25050

2006 rule changes: http://nflexperts.scout.com/2/556118.html

2005 rule changes: http://patriots.scout.com/2/425806.html

2004 rule changes: http://football.about.com/od/nationalfootballleague/a/04rulechanges.htm

1994-2003 rule changes: http://www.jt-sw.com/football/pro/index.nsf/Documents/0-rules

That's as far back as I'm going, but clearly it's not a new rule in the last 13 years.
Wow, that is impressive!

I now know two things:

1. That it is NOT a new rule, and
2. I will never argue with you :D
 
I see PFT is jumping on board and saying how this thing will grow legs, and just keep getting bigger and bigger... Can this just go away please....:bricks:
 
This is a joke, like an Aprils Fools joke.

This lawsuit will get no where, it is just meant to stir up good press for the Litigants and bad for the Pats.

I do not feel ashamed, these jokers do not speak for me and I hate lawyers in general.

Mangini and the Jets have nothing to do with these guys, and neither do I. There is plenty of reasons to be ashamed about being a Jet fan but this isn't one of those reasons.
 
I find this hilarious, I can't believe these lawyers are actually doing this, talk about a publicity stunt. I find it hilarious that PFT put this on their page, they are trying so hard to bring the Pats down, I love this, Jets keep whining, Pats keep winning. Enjoy the basement fellas!
 
News like this reminds me yet again of the line from Henry VI part 2:

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
 
Ok, here we go:

<blah>
That's as far back as I'm going, but clearly it's not a new rule in the last 13 years.

The no-taping rule is very unlikely to appear in lists like those... those lists cover ON-FIELD rules with perhaps some prominent off-field issues thrown in. Until this month taping an opponent wasn't a prominent issue... I suspect that that rule has been around a while but those links prove almost nothing.

(Plus: those links covers off-season rule changes only. Who's to say the non-videotaping rule wasn't added mid-season? )
 
It's a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. IOW, they have no case. Look for a motion for attorneys fees as well and a possible motion for sanctions under FRCP 11 (Bringing a case for an improper prupose, such as to harass, etc.).

PFT agrees with you that is likely, though he reserves judgement until he has read the actual claims in the lawsuit. Florio does bring up the possible real reason for the suit (which I bolded).

ProFootballlTalk said:
PATS HIT WITH CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT

A pair of lawyers in New Jersey have filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court on behalf of all Jets season-ticketholders who paid for seats to watch the Patriots and at the Meadowlands during the eight-year Bill Belichick era.

The action arises from the finding earlier this month that the Pats were secretly videotaping the defensive signals sent from the Jets' assistant coaches to the players on the field.

Alleging that the cheating violated the federal RICO laws and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, the lawsuit seeks $184 million in damages. The number comes from the $61.8 million paid for tickets to the game, which is trebled under the theories alleged.

"How many times have the Patriots done this? We find it hard to believe they did it just once," attorney Carl Mayer said, according to the Associated Press. "We just want to get to the truth of the matter of what the Patriots did to the Jets. I think the ticket holders are genuinely concerned about it. This is a type of misrepresentation."

Cases of this nature -- which some might call aggressive and others might describe as frivolous -- hinge initially on the identification of one or more legal theories that, if the facts alleged are proven to be true, will support a claim for the relief sought. On that point, we plan to track down a copy of the complaint and give it a fair and objective analysis.

If the lawsuit can survive an initial challenge based on what's known in the profession as a "motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim" under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, then the question becomes whether the plaintiffs can prove the alleged facts.

And the problem for the Patriots is that the evidence of historical cheating was given to the NFL, which promptly destroyed it.

Um, that's a potential problem.

The suit also will expose Belichick and his current and former assistant coaches and all current and former employees of the football operations to depositions under oath.

That's a potential problem, too.

Stay tuned on this one. The primary battleground will be the motion to dismiss. Because once the pre-trial discovery process begins, things could turn very ugly, very quickly.

To be honest, I think the depositions under oath might be a GOOD thing, because I think there is less there then almost everyone thinks and this could settle the issue. But i doubt it will get that far.
 
Last edited:
no disrespect by this comment, but I love the US legal system. If only I can spill a hot cup of coffee at McDonalds on myself - then I'll be set for life!!
 
no disrespect by this comment, but I love the US legal system. If only I can spill a hot cup of coffee at McDonalds on myself - then I'll be set for life!!

No disrespect to you... but you have nothing more than a superficial (and probably incorrect) understanding of that case. McDonalds at the time had a policy of keeping their coffee MUCH hotter than needed - to the point that a normal spill (which is to be expected occasionally) could cause serious injury. They had this policy purely to save money, because when the coffee was extremely hot it would last longer and they wouldn't have to brew a new pot as often. In that case the judicial system worked as it should, it provided a financial reason for the company to change its dangerous policies.
 
Last edited:
To be honest, I think the depositions under oath might be a GOOD thing, because I think there is less there then almost everyone thinks and this could settle the issue. But i doubt it will get that far.

Depositions under oath are a bad thing in this case. This case will be all over Court TV. BB and the Pats want this to go away and this helps ensure it will not.
 
Last edited:
No disrespect to you... but you have nothing more than a superficial (and probably incorrect) understanding of that case. McDonalds at the time had a policy of keeping their coffee MUCH hotter than needed - to the point that a normal spill (which is to be expected occasionally) could cause serious injury. They had this policy purely to save money, because when the coffee was extremely hot it would last longer and they wouldn't have to brew a new pot as often. In that case the judicial system worked as it should, it provided a financial reason for the company to change its dangerous policies.

The case was a joke for multiple reasons. One is the sheer idiocy of putting hot coffee between your legs and then blaming the coffee 'maker' when a spill causes burns. Coffee will burn you at a temperature far lower than the temperature McDonald's had their coffee, including the temperatures used at other restaurants. The extraordinarily high heat had an impact on the extent of the burns, not necessarily on the woman getting any burns at all. Most people are wise enough to understand this, having burned themselves with coffee or tea they've made at home and learned this lesson at some point in their lives.

Even though the average temperature of the beverages recorded in this study was below the level that burned Stella Liebeck, liquids above 156 [degrees] F (69 [degrees] C) can still cause third-degree burns in one second, and those at temperatures of 149 [degrees] F (65 [degrees] C) can cause burns within two seconds.

Now, using the following article, check out the subsequent mean temperatures being used by restaurants. You'll note that, while it's lower than what McDonald's was using, it's still hot enough to cause burns. That's because people LIKE hot coffee. It's understood that you get very hot coffee, add what you want to it, and then wait until it cools to the temperature you like to drink it at.

http://www.allbusiness.com/sales/customer-service/683924-1.html

Another reason the coffee case was a joke was the ridiculous award won by the woman, most of which was in the form of $2.7 million in punitive damages. The award, in fact, was lowed a great deal, from over $2 million to under $0.5 million. Even people who sided with the old woman on a lot of the case felt the amount awarded was ludicrous. And it was.

P.S. The case was eventually settled for a non-disclosed amount of money.
 
Last edited:
Mangini and the Jets have nothing to do with these guys, and neither do I.

You had me listening....until you mentioned Mangini. He's a snitch and even worse a hypocrite.

To quote PinkFloyd.... If I had my way........I'd have all of then shot!

Bill Belichick will be with the Pats for a long time coming. Your team plays in our division. Good luck....nice knowing you!
 
Moga is probably behind it.

Moga...MOga...Moga


BTW....why would anyone in the world become a Jet fan??????

Haven't they always sucked horse c#ck?
 
Last edited:
BB being sued by Jet fan

Just now listening to fox sports radio, doing my delivery route, I heard the most craziest thing. A Jets fan season ticket holder is suing BB for decieving fans. He is accusing BB for decieving fans with this spygate thing. He is suing BB for a whopping 184 million dollars. I heard of people suing for some outrageous things, but this takes the cake.
 
Last edited:
Re: BB being sued by Jet fan

Sorry didn't see anything on this. Figured it would be front page news on here, so didn't see it. Moderator please merge.
 
Re: BB being sued by Jet fan

If you can't beat 'em, sue 'em!
 
I think it's become apparent that the RATS fanbase, has become more and more whiney, like a bunch of 2 year olds who can't get what they want. Like a previous poster said, they are bottom feeders.

RATS fans should be looking at what a piss poor job and product Mangina has been putting on the field, instead of looking elsewhere for their vindication that they were "wronged."
 
Last edited:
Re: BB being sued by Jet fan

Sorry didn't see anything on this. Figured it would be front page news on here, so didn't see it. Moderator please merge.


No prob, Frankie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Wolf, Patriots Target Chemistry After Adding WR Baker
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots WR Javon Baker Conference Call
TRANSCRIPT: Layden Robinson Conference Call
2024 Patriots Draft Picks – FULL LIST
MORSE: Did Rookie De-Facto GM Eliot Wolf Drop the Ball? – Players I Like On Day 3
MORSE: Patriots Day 2 Draft Opinions
Patriots Wallace “Extremely Confident” He Can Be Team’s Left Tackle
It’s Already Maye Day For The Patriots
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots OL Caedan Wallace Press Conference
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Day Two Draft Press Conference
Back
Top