Orlando Mediator Lawrence Kolin explores current issues in Alternative Dispute Resolution, including mediation and arbitration of complex cases by neutrals resulting in settlement of state and federal litigation and appeals. This blog covers a wide variety of topics-- local, national, and international-- and includes the latest on technology and Online Dispute Resolution affecting sophisticated lawyers and parties to lawsuits.
Showing posts with label NFL lawsuit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NFL lawsuit. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 12, 2019
NFL Claims Admin Audit Power Questioned
A claims administrator implementing the $1 billion NFL concussion litigation settlement is fighting efforts to limit auditing former players’ claims multiple times. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the firm alleges it is not limited to auditing claims a single time to stop ineligible payments. Reportedly, the settlement agreement and audit rules adopted by the special master allow audit of claims at any time in the process, even after payment. They assert a need to re-evaluate a player and his claim in the audit process whenever questions about the legitimacy of a player’s claimed diagnosis arise. A group of thirty claims brought by the same counsel were put into a second audit. He contended that forcing the claims into multiple rounds of audits goes against the broader settlement agreement and damages his clients’ due process rights. Reasons for re-examination of claims given include switching doctors while claims were being audited, and eventually using a doctor who allegedly gave a high neurocognitive impairment diagnosis to a former player, while continuing to work as a corporate spokesman and host public events. It is feared the settlement program would attract unscrupulous persons if claims were investigated in limited scenarios. The NFL and co-class counsel for the players did not yet comment. See full story here-- https://bit.ly/2TMqxEX and NFL concussion site regarding some 20,532 claimants here-- https://bit.ly/2F7z78Y
Monday, February 18, 2019
NFL Settles with QB Kaepernick
Quarterback Colin Kaepernick and former teammate Eric Reid reached a settlement with the NFL regarding their collusion grievance against the NFL. Both players were alleging league owners colluded to keep them out of the NFL. The decision to kneel during the national anthem made Kaepernick a divisive sports figure. Kaepernick either sat on the bench or kneeled during “The Star-Spangled Banner” before each game in protest for oppression of people of color and ongoing issues with police brutality. The last time Kaepernick played was in 2016 when he went 1-10 with the San Francisco 49ers. However, that litigation appears to be over and Kaepernick’s attorney said he still wants to play in the NFL. In a joint statement last week, the parties explained only that they had engaged in an ongoing dialogue with representatives and as a a result of those discussions, decided to resolve the pending grievances. Of course, the resolution of the matter is subject to a confidentiality agreement and so they state there will be no further comment by any party. Despite this, the media has continued to speculate on the settlement and in one report, Mike Freeman said his sources were speculating that the payout was in the $60-80 million range. Others, like Dan Patrick revealed that a source told him that the settlement could be as low as the $5 million range. Still others like Mike Florio, despite stating most settlements require the parties to keep the details of the deal quiet and confidential, wonders when the details will leak. He goes on to say the NFL’s 32 teams will know the amount, because they’ll each be paying a share and that it takes only one owner to get the number out, making it impossible for the league office to track down the leak. Only time will tell. See news coverage here-- https://bit.ly/2NerBvB and https://bit.ly/2IlOvT8 and https://bit.ly/2TVX2gO and NFL statement-- https://bit.ly/2SbbLmu
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
NFL Concussion Settlement Registration Begins
Retired National Football League (NFL) players can now register for compensation under the league’s historic $1 billion settlement. Interestingly, a judicial status conference in which the enrollment was announced was held not in the courtroom, but in the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. About 22,000 retirees are encouraged to get baseline neurological testing. The league expects more than 6,000 of them to eventually be diagnosed with dementia or Alzheimer's disease. Participants must register for the settlement by August 7th. The conference apparently began with opening remarks by U.S. District Judge Anita Brody, who presided over the settlement process. Brody was joined by lawyers for the players and the NFL. After stressing the registration deadline for all affected players is approaching soon, the league encouraged all class members to promptly register. The settlement provides payment for retired players diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, chronic traumatic encephalopathy (which is only diagnosed with an autopsy), Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and dementia. In addition to monetary compensation, the NFL has agreed to provide brain injury testing to players and provide payments to fund the education of concussion and sports-related brain injuries. No player will need to prove causation. The average award is expected to be about $190,000 for those suffering from Alzheimer's disease or moderate dementia. The awards do not cover depression or mood disorders. See full stories here-- http://bit.ly/2lkMGJK and http://bit.ly/2kIb0Ch
Sunday, April 24, 2016
Deflategate and latest NFL vs. NFLPA arbitration ruling
In a decision that might impact the ongoing Deflategate saga, this month an Arbitrator ruled that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is acting within his rights when he places a player on the exempt list for violating the league’s Personal Conduct Policy:
“The Article 46.1(a) ‘action’ that is embodied in the notice to a player and that will be at issue in the Article 46.2(a) appeal (heard either by a hearing officer or the Commissioner himself) must be an ‘action’ of the Commissioner...[T]here is no basis either in the contractual documents or the past practices of the Parties to conclude that the Commissioner may completely delegate to a disciplinary officer or anyone else...”
If applied to the Brady case, this ruling could make it improper for Goodell to have delegated his powers to football operations executive Troy Vincent who imposed the punishment. Reportedly, the reason Goodell had Vincent “impose” the discipline was clear-- the commissioner wanted to serve as the arbitrator at the inevitable appeal hearing, because actual independent arbitrators had ruled against him too many times in recent cases-- a role he could not play if he were to be ruling on his own ruling. By delegating the power to Vincent, Goodell remained “impartial” in the process. Apparently, the NFLPA objected in a letter just days after the ruling, stating Vincent had no authority to impose discipline on Brady so it must be set aside.
Though an arbitrator can’t force the NFL to re-do the disciplinary process, if the Brady case gets remanded to Judge Richard Berman to examine this issue, it may impact the case of Tom Brady and the NFL. Judge Berman previously used Article 46 to favor Brady’s side over the NFL’s last year, but did not reach Brady’s other claims which included improperly delegating authority to discipline players for conduct detrimental to the NFL. Evidently, NFL precedent demonstrates that, in Article 46 arbitration appeals, players must be afforded the opportunity to confront their investigators.
The Deflategate case is currently being decided by a three-judge panel in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit which heard oral arguments last month. See story here-- http://cbsloc.al/1oVdYTS and http://bit.ly/1MR0UL5 and forthcoming decision at http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions.html UPDATE: A day after this post, based on a 2-1 vote of a three-judge federal panel, the appeals court reversed the district judge's ruling, siding with Commissioner Goodell over the NFL Players Association.
Monday, April 18, 2016
NFL No-Cap Concussion Settlement Approved
Just before the start of the 2013 professional football season, thousands of former players settled with the National Football League (NFL) over concussion-related suits. The league agreed to pay for medical benefits and injury compensation to retired players, as well as to fund medical exams, research and to pay litigation expenses. After that first deal was rejected by the trial court, a second deal doing away with a cap on the fund from which injured former players would draw was reached. The lower court, however, kept out a class of players who had argued that they should benefit from the settlement because in the future they may develop the disease chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). Failure to compensate players with CTE was the primary objection to the previously approved deal which only compensates for CTE if the player has died. Several players appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The appeals court noted that the research surrounding CTE is still nascent. Currently, CTE can be detected only by an autopsy of the brain, and the families of several former players who died and were found to have the condition stand to receive millions. Those awards apply only to players found before the settlement was approved. Appellate judges in affirming approval of the deal stated,"This settlement will provide nearly $1 billion in value to the class of retired players. It is a testament to the players, researchers and advocates who have worked to expose the true human costs of a sport so many love. Though not perfect, it is fair." At the outset, the district judge had signaled a preference for settlement of the case, believing that the interests of all parties would be best served by a negotiated resolution. The settlement was characterized as avoiding litigating thousands of complex individual claims over many years and providing immediate relief and support. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and team owners claim they wanted to "do the right thing" for former players with neurological conditions who believe their problems stem from on-field concussions. The underlying case accused the league of hiding concussions to protect its image. See more here--http://nyti.ms/1pbsOWv and http://ble.ac/1qTAD4I
Tuesday, November 24, 2015
NFL Concussion Settlement Oral Argument
Just before the start of the regular season in 2013, thousands of former players first settled with the National Football League (NFL) over concussion-related suits. The league agreed to pay for medical benefits and injury compensation to retired players, as well as to fund medical exams, research and to pay litigation expenses. The lawsuits accused the league of hiding known risks of concussions and returning injured players to games. After that first deal was rejected by the trial court, a second deal doing away with a cap on the fund from which injured former players would draw was reached. Reportedly, the second settlement approved earlier this year could payout more than $1 billion. The lower court, however, kept out a class of players who had argued that they should benefit from the settlement because in the future they may develop the disease chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). Failure to compensate players with CTE is the primary objection to the previously approved deal which only compensates for CTE if the player has died. Several players appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Currently, CTE can be detected only by an autopsy of the brain, and the families of several former players who died and were found to have the condition stand to receive up to $4 million. Those awards apply only to players found before the settlement was approved last April. Apparently, appellate judges appeared skeptical during oral argument last week, noting that those conditions were widely prevalent in the general population and that players who developed the conditions would not necessarily have CTE. One judge on the panel even remarked that the settlement could be watered down by every depressed field-goal kicker. The case faced significant legal hurdles at the start that could have landed the case in arbitration instead of federal court. At the outset, the district judge signaled a preference for settlement of the case, believing that the interests of all parties would be best served by a negotiated resolution. The settlement was characterized as avoiding litigating thousands of complex individual claims over many years and providing immediate relief and support. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and team owners claim they wanted to "do the right thing" for former players with neurological conditions who believe their problems stem from on-field concussions. The appeals court noted that the settlement included a provision that obligates lawyers for the league and the retired players to have good-faith negotiations in the coming years to consider future science and other issues. The appellants’ lawyers argued that was inadequate because the NFL maintains veto power over any settlement amendments. See more here-- http://nyti.ms/1MYEIHZ
Friday, April 24, 2015
Court Approves NFL Concussion Settlement
After the first deal was rejected by the trial court just over a year ago, a second deal doing away with a $675 million cap on the fund from which injured former players would draw was reached. Reportedly, the National Football League (NFL) projects 6,000 of some 20,000 retired football players will suffer from dementia or Alzheimer's disease. The approved settlement could payout more than $1 billion. Plaintiffs lawyers not involved in negotiations on the second deal may still appeal over previously expressed concerns about the settlement terms. One attempt to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit failed last fall, with that court declining to exercise jurisdiction on review of an order granting or denying class certification. The issue on appeal involved preliminary approval of the settlement and granting conditional certification of the class for settlement purposes. Even now that approval of the settlement is final, it could be appealed which would delay benefits to eligible players. Failure to compensate players with chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is the primary objection to the deal which only compensates for CTE if the player has died. The case faced significant legal hurdles at the start that could have landed the case in arbitration instead of federal court. At the outset, the district judge signaled a preference for settlement of the case, believing that the interests of all parties would be best served by a negotiated resolution. The settlement has been characterized as avoiding litigating thousands of complex individual claims over many years and providing immediate relief and support. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and team owners claim they wanted to "do the right thing" for former players with neurological conditions who believe their problems stem from on-field concussions. The lawsuit accused the league of hiding known risks of concussions for decades to return players to games and protect its image. See more here-- http://bit.ly/1x1uRxX and settlement info here-- http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32420600 and http://bit.ly/1bAyhjS and www.nflconcussionsettlement.com
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Will Preemption Cause NFL Concussion Opt-outs to Opt-in Settlement?
The NFL maintains the appropriate forum for dealing with player injuries and concussions should be the Collective Bargaining Agreement grievance process, not litigation. For players that opted out of the NFL Concussion Settlement and are continuing their concussion litigation, a motion to dismiss based on preemption may be back on the table when just last week, a federal judge dismissed the prescription drug lawsuit filed by 1,300 former players (Richard Dent et al. v. NFL) on preemption grounds. In that case, the judge decided that the league addressed serious concerns in a serious way-- by imposing duties on the clubs via collective bargaining and placing a long line of health-and-safety duties on the team owners themselves. He went on to state that these benefits may not have been perfect, but they have been uniform across all clubs and not left to the vagaries of state common law. They are backed up by the enforcement power of the union itself and the players' right to enforce these benefits. This does not bode well for the former players that opted out of the settlement thousands of former players made with the National Football League (NFL) over concussion-related suits last summer. The league is reportedly paying $765 million for medical benefits and injury compensation to retired players, as well as funding medical exams, research and litigation expenses. The settlement has been characterized as avoiding litigating thousands of complex individual claims over many years and providing immediate relief and support. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and team owners reportedly wanted to "do the right thing" for former players with neurological conditions who believe their problems stem from on-field concussions. The lawsuits accused the league of hiding known risks of concussions for decades to return players to games and protect its image. For the lawyers who negotiated the proposed settlement of the NFL's massive concussion litigation, the agreement was groundbreaking. For the lawyers whose clients objected to the settlement, it fails to compensate players suffering from the "industrial disease of football," and it allows the league to escape any determination of whether the league concealed the effects of head injuries from its players. Defending the deal, NFL and the players' attorneys insisted they wanted to help suffering players now, emphasizing difficulty in litigating causation between blows to the head and brain damage known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in these football concussion cases. See more here-- http://bit.ly/1x1uRxX and settlement info here-- https://www.nflconcussionsettlement.com
Friday, November 21, 2014
NFL Concussion Settlement Questioned
This week, a hearing took place to consider the deal covering thousands of former players that settled with the National Football League (NFL) over concussion-related suits last summer. The league is reportedly paying $765 million for medical benefits and injury compensation to retired players, as well as funding medical exams, research and litigation expenses. The settlement has been characterized as avoiding litigating literally thousands of complex individual claims over many years and providing immediate relief and support. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and the owners reportedly wanted to "do the right thing" for former players with neurological conditions who believe their problems stem from on-field concussions. The lawsuits accused the league of hiding known risks of concussions for decades to return players to games and protect its image. For the lawyers who negotiated the proposed settlement of the NFL's massive concussion litigation, the agreement was groundbreaking. For the lawyers whose clients objected to the settlement, it fails to compensate players suffering from the "industrial disease of football," and it allows the league to escape any determination of whether the league concealed the effects of head injuries from its players. Now a judge must decide whether the agreement is fair, adequate and reasonable, following a lengthy hearing and request for written briefs before a decision. Defending the deal, NFL and the players' attorneys insisted they wanted to help suffering players now, emphasizing difficulty in litigating causation between blows to the head and brain damage known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in these football concussion cases. See full story here-- http://es.pn/1xVGuVJ and settlement info here-- https://www.nflconcussionsettlement.com
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
NFL Helmet Maker Mediation
Last month, before the start of the NFL regular season, thousands of former players settled with the National Football League over concussion-related suits for $765 million. However, the apparent amicable resolution to their case doesn’t mean litigation is over. NFL helmet manufacturer Riddell and former players are continuing talks because the deal doesn’t include Riddell. While those negotiations remain confidential by order of the federal judge to "refrain from publicly discussing the mediation process or disclosing any discussions they may have as part of that process,” the proposed settlement between the NFL and some 4,500 former players awaits court approval and a determination on fees. In a prior order, the presiding judge, Hon. Anita Brody, expressed her belief that "the interests of all parties would be best served by a negotiated resolution of this case. The settlement holds the prospect of avoiding lengthy, expensive and uncertain litigation, and of enhancing the game of football.” Riddell may remain exposed following a state jury verdict this year in Colorado, determining that Riddell failed to adequately warn a former football player about the dangers of concussions, resulting in a $3.1 million damages. In this federal matter, Riddell had argued their case should be heard separately from the case against the NFL, but a motion to sever was never granted before ordering the Riddell defendants into the global mediation. See articles here-- http://bit.ly/1fXmCX8 and http://bit.ly/15hvyFk
Thursday, August 29, 2013
NFL Settles Concussion Claims
Just before the start of the regular season, thousands of former players settled today with the National Football League (NFL) over concussion-related suits. The league will reportedly pay $765 million for medical benefits and injury compensation to retired players, as well as funding medical exams, research and litigation expenses. Former U.S. District Judge, Layn Phillips, mediated the settlement and stated,"Rather than litigate literally thousands of complex individual claims over many years, the parties have reached an agreement that, if approved, will provide relief and support where it is needed at a time when it is most needed." NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and the owners gave the legal team direction to "do the right thing" for former players with neurological conditions who believe their problems stem from on-field concussions. The lawsuits accused the league of hiding known risks of concussions for decades to return players to games and protect its image. See story here-- http://on.wsj.com/1a2uTM0 and NFL press release http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000235494/article/nfl-explayers-reach-settlement-agreement-in-concussion-suit
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
Concussion case by NFL players heads to Mediation
A federal case brought by former National Football League players that accuses the league of hiding dangers of concussions has been ordered to mediation. A pending motion to dismiss the case will be taken under advisement until September, giving the mediator time to bring the sides closer together. United States District Court Judge Anita Brody of Pennsylvania, ordered a retired federal judge to serve as mediator in the case. Players have charged that the league concealed for decades what it knew about the long-term effects of repeated hits to the head. The NFL maintains it issued warnings consistent with medical research available at the time. Additionally, the league contends player safety is governed by collective bargaining agreements. Each side has made strong arguments, but there is incentive to settle early. Though the owners have greater ability to absorb legal fees, discovery over a period of years could unearth evidence that might hurt the league’s reputation. Likewise, retired players, many of whom have significant health concerns, may prefer to settle sooner for less. Without a ruling, the scope of the case remains wide, involving players from decades ago, as well as those who retired recently. “Presumably, the [mediator] is experienced and he can give both sides an appraisal of the case from the perspective of someone who’s sat on the bench,” said Matthew Mitten, director of Marquette University's National Sports Law Institute. “It doesn’t hurt to take a step back and take a reality check.” See full article here-- http://nyti.ms/1bkQYmL
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Knocking heads together for NFL settlement
At NFL meetings this week, settlement of a class action lawsuit against the league by retired players was announced along with the creation of a league fund to help former players in need. Jim Brown, who lobbied hard for the deal, was asked incidentally about his opinion of the proposal to ban backs from using their head to smash into defenders. “I didn’t use my head,” Brown said. “I wasn’t putting my head into too much of anything. I don’t think that’s a good idea." The NFL agreed to pay $42 million as part of a settlement with a group of retired players who challenged the league over using their names and images without consent. The league will use the money to fund a trust to help retired players with an array of issues including medical expenses, housing and career transition. The settlement also establishes a licensing agency for retired players to ensure they are compensated for the use of their identities in promotional materials."We look forward to building an unprecedented new relationship with retired players that will benefit everybody, especially those who need extra medical or financial assistance," Commissioner Roger Goodell said in a statement issued by the league. The federal class action lawsuit accused the NFL of blatantly exploiting retired players' identities in films, highlight reels and memorabilia to market the league's "glory days." The so-called Common Good fund will be administered by a group of retired players approved by the court. A licensing agency will for the first time market retired players' publicity rights in conjunction with the NFL, making it easier for retired players to work with potential sponsors and advertisers. A new licensing agency, to be overseen by a board of retired players, will streamline that process for one-stop shopping. The league will also pay another $8 million in assorted costs associated with the settlement, including money needed to help set up the trust and pay attorneys. The settlement still needs court approval. Retired players will have the chance to review the settlement throughout the summer, when final approval is scheduled. See items at http://bit.ly/ZYSmUF and http://on.nfl.com/ZtAHW8
Saturday, September 8, 2012
Arbitrators throw out NFL suspensions
An NFL arbitration panel threw out the League’s suspensions of four players involved with the New Orleans Saints bounty or pay-to-injure case. A one year suspension of linebacker Jonathan Vilma was overturned, along with shorter suspensions to Scott Fujita, Anthony Hargrove and Will Smith, according to the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA). League Commissioner, Roger Goodell, suspended the players last May, but the latest decision apparently doesn’t affect suspensions handed down to Saints coaches. This was an appeal of an earlier grievance decision by Arbitrator, Stephen Burbank, that upheld the Commissioner's authority under the collective bargaining agreement to impose "conduct detrimental" discipline on players who provided or offered to provide financial incentives to injure opponents. The appeals panel of arbitrators consisted of retired San Francisco federal Judge Fern Smith, retired New York federal Judge Richard Howell, and Georgetown Professor James Oldham. The decision could impact consolidated federal lawsuits brought against the NFL by linebacker Vilma and the NFLPA on behalf of the other three players until Commissioner Goodell decides whether to reissue punishment within his power. U.S. District Judge Ginger Berrigan was spared from having to decide before Sunday on a TRO requested by the players. Interestingly, earlier in the week, Judge Berrigan lamented failure of settlement talks wrote she was concerned competing agendas among lawyers on all sides in the dispute were undermining the interests of the players-- asking whether it made more sense for Smith, Fujita and Hargrove to have separate lawyers, rather than the same lawyers representing the NFLPA. The players informed the judge in documents filed that they were comfortable with union representation. See stories-http://fxn.ws/PcFlEE and http://bit.ly/PSLCT8 and http://buswk.co/QslG3s and http://wapo.st/OXj4st and NFLPA statement-https://m.nflplayers.com
Thursday, July 19, 2012
Super Bowl Tix Suit v. NFL to Proceed without Cowboys
Following a failed mediation earlier this summer, U.S. District Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn of Texas threw out all claims against the Dallas Cowboys and owner Jerry Jones today, ruling that a Super Bowl game ticket constitutes a contract between the NFL and a purchaser. Some of the lawsuit was already dismissed and many ticket holders accepted the NFL’s offer of compensation. The NFL and lawyers for the ticket holders still suing engaged in mediation previously, followed by a motion claiming the NFL negotiated in bad faith, purposefully delaying proceedings for months while allegedly falsely claiming to be truly interested in resolving the case. Fans moved to other seats were offered refunds or a ticket to a future Super Bowl, while those not seated at all were offered their choice of $5,000 cash or $2,400 and a trip to a future Super Bowl, with airfare and hotel included. Most of the 3,200 fans affected accepted. The league must also defend fraud in the inducement claims brought by fans whose seats had obstructed views at the 2011 Super Bowl Game at Cowboys Stadium during the game between the Green Bay Packers and Pittsburgh Steelers. Some 475 ticket holders who watched the game on video screens and another 2,800 fans that were given new seats or kept waiting outside the stadium can also pursue their claims against the NFL. Simms v. Jones, Case No. 3:11-cv-00248, U.S. District Court, Northern District Texas; See stories - http://bloom.bg/LZrmmq and http://bit.ly/MoumGW and http://bit.ly/NBFdgY and http://bit.ly/NUmQA8
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
NBA looking for NFL-type resolution in same Court
In apparent forum shopping, the NBA players refiled their federal antitrust lawsuit in Minnesota, seeking a settlement conference following the very same pattern of the NFL lockout. In the judge-directed mediation conducted by Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan over several sessions with the NFL, full litigation was avoided and football season was saved. Billy Hunter is now telling NBA fans not to give up and to put pressure on the players and owners, though there has been no contact between the parties since talks broke off upon the NBA players' union dissolving. My earlier entry reported on the impasse that resulted from mediator George Cohen's efforts. See story here: http://nyp.st/tyOiK2
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
NBA Tuesday - Perhaps these guys could just mediate?
Today's NBA lockout negotiations are expected to decide whether games will be lost this season and just how many. The path to sports labor peace leads to the bargaining table, not to a courthouse. Rather than a protracted court battle between owners and the players' union, nasty internal strife, not to mention no professional basketball (e.g., here in a town with the star center in his last contract year, playing in a new arena that was promised hosting an all-star game), the parties should mediate, just as the NFL did. http://bit.ly/prn2JT
Last month, NBA players' union members were worried enough about the possibility of agents pushing decertification that they had DeMaurice Smith of the NFL Players Association to speak to locked out basketballers about the pros and cons of dissolving a union, giving some background on what it was like with his players going through the lockout. http://goo.gl/ueY3p
Through negotiations and judge-directed mediation sessions, footballers and owners bargained before the NFL players' union suffered any judicial setback in the Brady v. NFL antitrust case, or worse-- if they won the case. Such a loss would have crippled the union's decertification threat in the future. A union win could have prohibited teams from collaborating on contracts. http://tinyurl.com/3qn89ao
Another incentive to settle the matter now is that public opinion of sports leagues has bordered on critical in recent years; though die-hard fans will endure. Avoiding the surely negative effect of these monetary disputes as early as possible (especially in this down economy) may stop harm to morale and can be achieved in a less public way though the mediation process.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
"It ain't over till it's over"
The NFL lockout lawsuit spawned a claim by retirees which wasn't quite resolved in the bigger deal between the league owners and players.
During a case management conference, Judge Nelson quickly suggested talks with Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan, who brokered the original agreement that ended the lockout but did not settle the retirees' still-pending lawsuit.
Judge-directed settlement talks have been a theme of the recent negotiations in this litigation. In motivating the claimants to settle, she hinted that the case would be difficult likening it to "pushing a rock up a hill."
However, rather than ordering mediation, she told the three sides to sit down with Boylan for informal talks. Subsequently, lawyers for all sides said the discussions produced no agreement or date for additional mediation.
Perhaps a formal order of referral to mediation would have made them take things more seriously? The next scheduled hearing is not until September 15th.
See more at: http://bit.ly/r49vZa
During a case management conference, Judge Nelson quickly suggested talks with Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan, who brokered the original agreement that ended the lockout but did not settle the retirees' still-pending lawsuit.
Judge-directed settlement talks have been a theme of the recent negotiations in this litigation. In motivating the claimants to settle, she hinted that the case would be difficult likening it to "pushing a rock up a hill."
However, rather than ordering mediation, she told the three sides to sit down with Boylan for informal talks. Subsequently, lawyers for all sides said the discussions produced no agreement or date for additional mediation.
Perhaps a formal order of referral to mediation would have made them take things more seriously? The next scheduled hearing is not until September 15th.
See more at: http://bit.ly/r49vZa
Monday, July 4, 2011
Retired NFL Players Seek Inclusion In Mediation
The unusual goal of a newly filed complaint is to have Judge Nelson, under whose orders the existing lawsuit's mediated negotiations are being held, instruct the mediator, the league and the current players to allow representatives of the retired players to be active participants in the negotiations.
The latest class-action complaint is aimed against the teams, the league, the players named in the Brady v. N.F.L. lawsuit and DeMaurice Smith, the head of the N.F.L. Players Association. It asserts that the sides are violating antitrust laws by negotiating settlement terms that improperly encompassed the rights of retired players in the time since the N.F.L.P.A. renounced its union status. Namely, it alleges the are conspiring to depress the amounts of pension and disability benefits to be paid.
Apparently, lawyers for the present players e-mailed to attorneys for retired players stating they would negotiate issues like the salary cap and free-agency rules, while lawyers for retired players would be allowed to suggest retired-player issues in connection with proposals before the mediator, Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan.
Certainly, these developments will impact the pending NFL suits and may even influence the NBA litigation.
See report at: http://nyti.ms/iRsNxn
The latest class-action complaint is aimed against the teams, the league, the players named in the Brady v. N.F.L. lawsuit and DeMaurice Smith, the head of the N.F.L. Players Association. It asserts that the sides are violating antitrust laws by negotiating settlement terms that improperly encompassed the rights of retired players in the time since the N.F.L.P.A. renounced its union status. Namely, it alleges the are conspiring to depress the amounts of pension and disability benefits to be paid.
Apparently, lawyers for the present players e-mailed to attorneys for retired players stating they would negotiate issues like the salary cap and free-agency rules, while lawyers for retired players would be allowed to suggest retired-player issues in connection with proposals before the mediator, Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan.
Certainly, these developments will impact the pending NFL suits and may even influence the NBA litigation.
See report at: http://nyti.ms/iRsNxn
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
While one pair attempts to settle, the other wants deal undone
As discussed, NFL players and owners today resume talks (pending a ruling from Judge Nelson on the lockout) after being together for longer than nine hours last Thursday in the Minneapolis courtroom chambers of federal Magistrate Judge Arthur J. Boylan. The mediation recessed Friday after more than four hours. The hiatus in talks followed reports that last week's talks were "tough" and included a large amount of "fence-mending" and even "homework" for the participants...
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14962875/nfl-mediation-talks-set-to-resume-tuesday
On the other hand, the Olympic rowers and would-be Facebook creators, the "Winklevi" are seeking a rehearing en banc to undo their $65 million (now worth $200M) settlement with Facebook, after being told no by a three judge appellate panel in San Francisco...
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/18/winklevoss-twins-ask-for-new-hearing-in-facebook-case/
In either case, there must be some finality to the litigation so the parties can move on! Hopefully, for football fans, continued mediation is successful and for fans of the self-determination process, the prior Facebook settlement agreement is upheld in the absence coercion or fraud.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14962875/nfl-mediation-talks-set-to-resume-tuesday
On the other hand, the Olympic rowers and would-be Facebook creators, the "Winklevi" are seeking a rehearing en banc to undo their $65 million (now worth $200M) settlement with Facebook, after being told no by a three judge appellate panel in San Francisco...
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/18/winklevoss-twins-ask-for-new-hearing-in-facebook-case/
In either case, there must be some finality to the litigation so the parties can move on! Hopefully, for football fans, continued mediation is successful and for fans of the self-determination process, the prior Facebook settlement agreement is upheld in the absence coercion or fraud.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)