NFL final appeal brief filed

[Deus Irae]

The scary thing is that Wells said he thought his investigation was enough for him to vote guilty if he was a juror and this was evidence in a criminal case. Obviously, he's not going to say anything to undermine his own report, but that's not the only analogy he could have made. The fact that he would send someone to jail based on one text message, when the rest of the evidence showed that, worst case scenario, it was questionable a crime even took place, is a kind of disturbing.

Wells is the same guy who deliberately took locker room banter out of context in the Miami investigation. He's a hired gun who's shown me nothing in the realm of demonstrated ethics, when it comes this his work for the NFL on the two investigations.

 

[moejr]

We'll have to agree to disagree. They are asking the court to be "passive" in the context of Brady's counterclaim, thus rubber-stamping Roger as they had originally asked when they first went to court.

Do you think the NFL will get their reversal?

 

[strngplyr]

Alderaan got what it deserved.

So, you're saying Aleran shot first? ****.

 

[Fencer]

All the worst Brady claims in the briefs...never spoken by Goodell. Why? To shield from defamation suits.

We have bingo.

I was thinking earlier in this thread that reporters should put Goodell on the spot as to whether he believes Brady cheated in these ways. Even if he weasel-words it, it would be hard for him to get away with saying less than "Yes, I agree with those charges".

 

[Fencer]

Inconsistent is not illegal. Inconsistent is not unique. It happens with frequency.

In this case, the NFL practically ran to the courthouse in order to forum shop and get a court to take action by doing their specific bidding. The NFL then proceeded to cry about the court once it did take action, but did not do their bidding. In other words, they wanted an interventionist court, right up to the point where the intervention went against them, and then they wanted a completely non-interventionist court.

It doesn't get much more inconsistent than that.

I'm sorry, but that's a bonkers argument.

The NFL has consistently taken the position that the CBA can only be interpreted in one way, and it wants the courts to enforce that interpretation.

You are, however, totally right about the forum shopping. I don't think they even deny it.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

This reply brief by the league is pretty much drivel but they really don't have much to work with. I'd be very surprised if the District Court decision get reversed for these reasons:

1. Generally speaking, Appellate Court are reluctant to reverse lower court's unless there's a pretty compelling reason to. Just not seeing it here.

2. Federal Court Judges REALLY resent having their time wasted by trivial matters. This matter is about as trivial as it gets.

I hope and pray that that the Court accepts the Amicus Curiae brief and using it as a basis to give Goodell a public verbal beat down he so richly deserves. This could be the federal court's best opportunity to send a strong, clear message to Goodell: "schmuck! stop wasting our valuable time and court resources on this garbage."

 

[Ken Canin]

This reply brief by the league is pretty much drivel but they really don't have much to work with. I'd be very surprised if the District Court decision get reversed for these reasons:

1. Generally speaking, Appellate Court are reluctant to reverse lower court's unless there's a pretty compelling reason to. Just not seeing it here.

2. Federal Court Judges REALLY resent having their time wasted by trivial matters. This matter is about as trivial as it gets.

I disagree with your claims (1) and (2):

(1) An appellate court (why are you apparently randomly capping this and other phrases?) would not be reluctant to reverse a lower court if the lower court decision is reviewed de novo. That ipso facto is what "de novo" is supposed to mean. I do not know whether the decision will be reviewed de novo, however, but I believe that this is what the appellants are requesting. Obviously, if a greater standard of deference applies, then the appellate court should give some deference to the lower court.

(2) Your claim about "Federal Court Judges" resenting time-wasting is inapplicable here. First of all, this is about appellate, not district court judges, whereas your claim relates irrelevantly to all of them. Second, this is obviously not a trivial case, either as a matter of law, of financial significance, or of public interest. The vast majority of the appellate caseload will be of far less legal interest or significance than this case; the overwhelming majority of the district court caseload is mindbogglingly dull and inconsequential compared to this.

 

[Ken Canin]

Do you think the NFL will get their reversal?

I skimmed them, and my sense is that the quality of the work product from the point of view of writing style is extremely high in the NFL brief. I did not delve deeply into the substantive arguments.

At least some of the NFL appellate attorneys involved most likely know that Brady is innocent, by the way, although of course that doesn't affect their representation of their client.

Paul Clement, for example, is an extremely experienced litigator who would not have been fooled by the rhetorical tricks the Wells report relies on to puff up the significance of the texts. More important, Clement also has an Econ. background, which presumably gives him the tools to understand how absurd the scientific arguments in the Wells report are. Sadly, this doesn't help Brady: it's not Clement's job to represent Brady. Indeed, Brady could lose the appellate case even if every judge and every attorney in the courtroom knew he was innocent.

 

[DanishPatFan]

I just dont understand how we could lose a 1.round pick when Brady won..

 

[DarrylS]

Can the NFL rebut and add the nefarious plot discovered by Ben Volin regarding Alex Guerrero??

After all Volin's intent to to make this national news so "Cubby" could somehow increase his visibility... oh how the media loves the attention it generates about themselves..

 

[Husse]

I just dont understand how we could lose a 1.round pick when Brady won..

Because this has nothing to do with the innocence or guilt. The legal dispute is about if the NFL and Roger Godell gave Brady a fair appeal and/or had the right to suspend Brady for the reason they stated.

 

[Clonamery]

I just dont understand how we could lose a 1.round pick when Brady won..

Welcome to 1984.

 

[ivanvamp]

The scary thing is that Wells said he thought his investigation was enough for him to vote guilty if he was a juror and this was evidence in a criminal case. Obviously, he's not going to say anything to undermine his own report, but that's not the only analogy he could have made. The fact that he would send someone to jail based on one text message, when the rest of the evidence showed that, worst case scenario, it was questionable a crime even took place, is a kind of disturbing.

Even if the text said, "Brady instructed me to deflate footballs in the AFCCG against the Colts."

It's like finding a text on your phone saying, "I'm going to steal Bob's car." Ok that's pretty obvious and incriminating right? But then your defense attorney says, "Um, your honor, nobody stole Bob's car. It's still sitting in his garage."

"Yeah but the text says he was going to steal it!"

"Understood. But, um, again, nobody ACTUALLY stole the car. It has never left the garage. It's still there."

"But the text..."

"The car is still there. Nobody stole it. Not my client. Not anybody."

"The text..."

-sigh-

 

[RobertWeathers]

We have bingo.

I was thinking earlier in this thread that reporters should put Goodell on the spot as to whether he believes Brady cheated in these ways. Even if he weasel-words it, it would be hard for him to get away with saying less than "Yes, I agree with those charges".

No kidding...its been almost a year a no one has the guts to do it.

Amazing.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

The scary thing is that Wells said he thought his investigation was enough for him to vote guilty if he was a juror and this was evidence in a criminal case. Obviously, he's not going to say anything to undermine his own report, but that's not the only analogy he could have made. The fact that he would send someone to jail based on one text message, when the rest of the evidence showed that, worst case scenario, it was questionable a crime even took place, is a kind of disturbing.

Actually, no. The standard of proof in a criminal case is , "beyond a reasonable doubt". The standard required in a civil (non-criminal) case like this is "by a preponderance of the evidence" which means more likely than not. Wells claimed that his investigation showed enough evidence for a civil standard to apply...

 

[Mack Herron]

I just dont understand how we could lose a 1.round pick when Brady won..

Because the suspension was a penalty levied against Brady, and he appealed it. The draft picks were a penalty levied against the team, and Kraft accepted it. In his own words:

“So I have two options: I can try to end it, or extend it.
You know, what I’ve learned over the last two decades is that the heart and soul and strength of the NFL is a partnership of 32 teams. And what’s become very clear over those very two decades is at no time should the agenda of one team outweigh the collective good of the full 32. So I have a way of looking at problems that are very strong in my mind, and before I make a final decision, I measure nine times and I cut once.
But believing in the strength of the partnership, and the 32 teams — we have concentrated the power of adjudication of problems in the office of the commissioner. And although I might disagree with what is decided, I do have respect for the commissioner and believe that he’s doing what he perceives to be in the best interests of the full 32. So in that spirit, I don’t want to continue the rhetoric that’s gone on for the last four months. I’m going to accept, reluctantly, what he has given to us, and not continue this dialogue and rhetoric. And we won’t appeal.

“Now, I know that a lot of Patriot fans are going to be disappointed in that decision. But I hope they trust my judgment and know that I really feel at this point in time that taking this off the agenda, this is the best thing for the New England Patriots, our fans and the NFL. And I hope you all can respect that.

Kraft: I disagree with Goodell, but I accept it and we won’t appeal

 

[Clonamery]

I skimmed them, and my sense is that the quality of the work product from the point of view of writing style is extremely high in the NFL brief. I did not delve deeply into the substantive arguments.

At least some of the NFL appellate attorneys involved most likely know that Brady is innocent, by the way, although of course that doesn't affect their representation of their client.

Paul Clement, for example, is an extremely experienced litigator who would not have been fooled by the rhetorical tricks the Wells report relies on to puff up the significance of the texts. More important, Clement also has an Econ. background, which presumably gives him the tools to understand how absurd the scientific arguments in the Wells report are. Sadly, this doesn't help Brady: it's not Clement's job to represent Brady. Indeed, Brady could lose the appellate case even if every judge and every attorney in the courtroom knew he was innocent.

So what you're saying is Paul Clement is just a POS Ho.

 

[venecol]

Question: How is it possible for the NFL to state that court has no business in this situation when it was the NFL, not the NFLPA, that brought the suit in the first place. Logic dictates that they have already rebutted their own argument. However, we are talking about Badell here, so logic has no place.

Because Munson says so.

 

[venecol]

Wells is the same guy who deliberately took locker room banter out of context in the Miami investigation. He's a hired gun who's shown me nothing in the realm of demonstrated ethics, when it comes this his work for the NFL on the two investigations.

Exactly, it's clear these investigations were not independent. Wells took his marching orders from the NFL, and as lawyers do delivered the desired results to his client.

 

[venecol]

I'm sorry, but that's a bonkers argument.

The NFL has consistently taken the position that the CBA can only be interpreted in one way, and it wants the courts to enforce that interpretation.

You are, however, totally right about the forum shopping. I don't think they even deny it.

Except that prior courts have ruled on that already and thus they are trying to reverse the precedent set by those courts. That's really what this is all about, restoring the perceived power the CBA gives the Commissioner that has been watered down by Minnesota courts. Their argument is not reasonable and apparently not founded in case law, per Berman, so I expect them to lose again, regardless of Munson's claims.