Jet Fan RI Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25255741/nfl-nflpa-want-to-resolve-tom-brady-lawsuit-before-2015-season-starts NFL, NFLPA want a resolution to the Brady lawsuit before 2015 season By Will Brinson | NFL Writer July 31, 2015 1:34 pm ET It's been widely believed that the NFL and NFLPA lawsuit regarding Tom Brady's suspension could drag out for a lengthy amount of time. However, according to court documents obtained by CBSSports.com, the two sides have agreed to find a "final resolution" to the matter before the 2015 NFL season begins. In a letter to Judge Richard Berman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, lawyers for the two teams requested the matter be expedited prior to thePatriots first game on Sept. 10. (In fact, they requested to have the matter done prior to Sept. 4 for preparation purposes.) "The NFLPA and Mr. Brady had intended to file a motion for a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction," the parties wrote. "However, the parties met and conferred and have agreed that a final resolution of this matter prior to the commencement of the 2015 NFL regular season would be in everyone's best interest." The two parties proposed the following schedule: Aug. 7: NFLPA and NFL cross move to vacate and confirm the suspension Aug. 14: Both parties file "respective papers" in support of those motions The parties schedule a date for oral arguments that would "enable a decision to be rendered by Sept. 4, when Brady's team must prepare for its first regular season game." This is fairly huge news. Instead of going after an injunction and trying to have Brady play while a suspension lingers in the background the two sides would apparently prefer to just figure everything out and get it out of the way in advance of the season starting. There's no mention of binding arbitration in the documents, but it sounds like the two sides would be willing to accept the court's decision and move forward with the football season after Judge Berman rules. Brady wants to move forward. (USATSI) Topics: Tom Brady, Deflategate, Will Brinson, New England Patriots, NFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 That's because it looks like the court doesn't want to hear the case. They told the parties to get it done on their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted July 31, 2015 Author Share Posted July 31, 2015 That's because it looks like the court doesn't want to hear the case. They told the parties to get it done on their own. Yeah, but the troubling part is that the NFL indicated it was interested in settling. Probably means an almost-certain reduction of the suspension, which was too short in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thshadow Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Yeah, but the troubling part is that the NFL indicated it was interested in settling. Probably means an almost-certain reduction of the suspension, which was too short in the first place. Why do you think the NFL indicated it was interested in settling? Brady wants it resolved before the season starts, and presumably the NFL has no objection to that. Spank his ass now, no need to wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted July 31, 2015 Author Share Posted July 31, 2015 Why do you think the NFL indicated it was interested in settling? Brady wants it resolved before the season starts, and presumably the NFL has no objection to that. Spank his ass now, no need to wait. Because it is stated in the article. Here's a quote: It's been widely believed that the NFL and NFLPA lawsuit regarding Tom Brady's suspension could drag out for a lengthy amount of time. However, according to court documents obtained by CBSSports.com, the two sides have agreed to find a "final resolution" to the matter before the 2015 NFL season begins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Why do you think the NFL indicated it was interested in settling? Brady wants it resolved before the season starts, and presumably the NFL has no objection to that. Spank his ass now, no need to wait. Depends on the settlement. To me it could be we're done, move on guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 That's because it looks like the court doesn't want to hear the case. They told the parties to get it done on their own. They tell everybody that on every case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 They tell everybody that on every case. Except a couple of the legal experts on TV said they had a hard time believing the courts would get involved in a case that was dealt with as per a CBA. That without new reasons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Except a couple of the legal experts on TV said they had a hard time believing the courts would get involved in a case that was dealt with as per a CBA. That without new reasons What does that even mean? Federal court has jurisdiction over the interpretation of the CBA. They can't just ignore it. Brady is claiming that the league did not properly follow the CBA in the discipline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thshadow Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Because it is stated in the article. Here's a quote: It's been widely believed that the NFL and NFLPA lawsuit regarding Tom Brady's suspension could drag out for a lengthy amount of time. However, according to court documents obtained by CBSSports.com, the two sides have agreed to find a "final resolution" to the matter before the 2015 NFL season begins. But that's not settlement talks. That's the whole trial, or whatever you call it. The NFL just said they agree to do things very quickly. But there's no mention of settlement talks. (Other than the court asking the parties if they can settle, and them saying no.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted July 31, 2015 Author Share Posted July 31, 2015 But that's not settlement talks. That's the whole trial, or whatever you call it. The NFL just said they agree to do things very quickly. But there's no mention of settlement talks. (Other than the court asking the parties if they can settle, and them saying no.) Don't think I understand what you are saying. If they come to an agreement before the season, they have in fact settled. Also, on another board there was a post indicating the judge had ordered the two sides to a settlement meeting by, I think, August 17. Sounds like settlement talks to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thshadow Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Don't think I understand what you are saying. If they come to an agreement before the season, they have in fact settled. Also, on another board there was a post indicating the judge had ordered the two sides to a settlement meeting by, I think, August 17. Sounds like settlement talks to me. No, that doc just lays out the trial schedule. Open that link you sent out: http://sports.cbsimg.net//images/visual/whatshot/show_temp.pdf (I can't cut and paste from it.) They're laying out when the motions are to be filed, etc. This isn't settlement talks, this is the trial in front of the judge. The judge will decide. I also read your reference to "judge-ordered settlement talks". I think this is SOP - the judge requires everyone to meet to see if there's common ground. That isn't any indication that either side is actually interested in settling. IOW - don't worry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted July 31, 2015 Author Share Posted July 31, 2015 No, that doc just lays out the trial schedule. Open that link you sent out: http://sports.cbsimg.net//images/visual/whatshot/show_temp.pdf (I can't cut and paste from it.) They're laying out when the motions are to be filed, etc. This isn't settlement talks, this is the trial in front of the judge. The judge will decide. I also read your reference to "judge-ordered settlement talks". I think this is SOP - the judge requires everyone to meet to see if there's common ground. That isn't any indication that either side is actually interested in settling. IOW - don't worry! Thanks for the reassurance. But I really am the worrying kind. Hope you're right though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFCEastFan Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 As a (mostly) bankruptcy lawyer, I can say that this process so far uncannily resembles a contested matter in a corporate bankruptcy case -- e.g. a judge that actively pushes settlement from the outset, and is willing to proceed on an expedited basis, and rule on the merits without an evidentiary hearing. In my experience, such a process usually results in a "rough justice" outcome that is not necessarily supported by a precise application of the law and that is generally unsatisfactory to both parties. My guess is that this case will yield a similar result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Law-Talkin' Guys is gonna have a cast of thousands at this rate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted August 1, 2015 Author Share Posted August 1, 2015 Law-Talkin' Guys is gonna have a cast of thousands at this rate Well it's in the legal system now. I think we're stuck with that right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 What does that even mean? Federal court has jurisdiction over the interpretation of the CBA. They can't just ignore it. Brady is claiming that the league did not properly follow the CBA in the discipline. It means they can ignore it. Courts routinely throw cases out. You can't just show up to court and have nonsense heard, wasting the courts time and money. If they look at Brady's claim and feel the CBA was enforced they don't have to hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villain The Foe Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 I thought the NFL resolved the situation already by handing down the suspension. Its Tom and the NFLPA not accepting the resolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 It means they can ignore it. Courts routinely throw cases out. You can't just show up to court and have nonsense heard, wasting the courts time and money. If they look at Brady's claim and feel the CBA was enforced they don't have to hear it. Courts hear this exact type of case all the time. They determine if the discipline was in line with the CBA and if the decision followed the proper procedures. In a case like this one, there isn't much in the way of similar discipline, so it is more difficult to say it is a slam dunk. I would have been shocked if they dismissed it out of hand. I think anybody else that does this kind of thing would be as well. There is much more room for interpretation than you or the talking heads are admitting and the courts are often very pro labor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 Courts hear this exact type of case all the time. They determine if the discipline was in line with the CBA and if the decision followed the proper procedures. In a case like this one, there isn't much in the way of similar discipline, so it is more difficult to say it is a slam dunk. I would have been shocked if they dismissed it out of hand. I think anybody else that does this kind of thing would be as well. There is much more room for interpretation than you or the talking heads are admitting and the courts are often very pro labor Brady's team wants the entire punishment removed. They're not arguing that it's unjustly harsh. To me they're asking the court to retry the case and I don't see why they would want to do that or should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 Brady's team wants the entire punishment removed. They're not arguing that it's unjustly harsh. To me they're asking the court to retry the case and I don't see why they would want to do that or should. Of course they are. The same way the court always encourages settlement, the appealing party always asks for total victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Lonelyhearts Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 Law-Talkin' Guys is gonna have a cast of thousands at this rate If anybody else called Brady can't file for an injunction because it might get dissolved too fast they're above the line. Failing that cast of one. ****ers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 If anybody else called Brady can't file for an injunction because it might get dissolved too fast they're above the line. Failing that cast of one. ****ers. I guess I could rewrite it as a Spalding Gray type thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Of course they are. The same way the court always encourages settlement, the appealing party always asks for total victory. Except when you say it's all or nothing you can put yourself in a tight spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.