2nd Circut denies Brady's request for rehearing

bababooey · July 13, 2016

per AP

He could go to supreme court but doubt they would hear it in time for season to start. Any lawyers know if it's possible for him to get a stay or something while he appeals to SC that allows him to play until they make a ruling (if they were to make one)?

Hoosier · July 13, 2016

Michael Silver just reported on NFLN that Ruth Bader Ginsburg oversees the 2nd Circuit and could grant Brady a stay while the Supreme Court decides whether or not it will even take the case.

No doubt his next move will be to appeal to her for a stay.

ColtsBlueFL · July 13, 2016

He has 90 days to appeal and can get a stay of the suspension. However, it is likely that the SCOTUS would act quickly to deny a hearing if it feels this case is nit deserving to be heard by the highest court in the land. And I feel it woul take the Minnesota court to rule in favor of Adrian Peterson in the NFL case there to create a split decision ( 2nd vs. 8th districts ) that may entice them to hear it. The chances Brady serves 4 games went up a notch.

(P.S. Not a lawyer, though.)

indyagent17 · July 13, 2016

its pretty sad that this will waste the courts time from hearing more germane cases

shakedownstreet · July 13, 2016

crazycolt1 · July 13, 2016

I know that everyone deserves due process but this has gotten to the point of ridiculous.

Yehoodi · July 13, 2016

1 hour ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

He has 90 days to appeal and can get a stay of the suspension. However, it is likely that the SCOTUS would act quickly to deny a hearing if it feels this case is nit deserving to be heard by the highest court in the land. And I feel it woul take the Minnesota court to rule in favor of Adrian Peterson in the NFL case there to create a split decision ( 2nd vs. 8th districts ) that may entice them to hear it. The chances Brady serves 4 games went up a notch.

(P.S. Not a lawyer, though.)

Yes from what I hear he has 90 days to file a petition with the Supreme Court. Then the court will need time to decide on the petition. I do not know the timing of the rulings on petitions, but one would guess it would likely be after the season is over; and if denied, he would serve his 4 game suspension starting in 2017 season.

As for the stay of execution of the 2nd Circuit's decision, I would be surprised if he is not granted a stay from either the 2nd Circuit panel or the single justice in the Supreme Court. Basically, he has a strong argument for irreparable harm as he could not get his games back if he wins his case.

ColtsBlueFL · July 13, 2016

5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I know that everyone deserves due process but this has gotten to the point of ridiculous.

I think we all agree, but our justice system fully allows this due process. If each side wants to spend $$ and play it out to the Nth degree, so be it. At some point the word becomes final and precedent set or augments prior rulings without further recourse.

csmopar · July 13, 2016

perhaps, but brady needs to just man up do his time and be done with it. Chances are if he does appeal, the supreme court denies it and then he sits out, possibly mid or late season or even the playoffs........

Superman · July 13, 2016

1 hour ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

He has 90 days to appeal and can get a stay of the suspension. However, it is likely that the SCOTUS would act quickly to deny a hearing if it feels this case is nit deserving to be heard by the highest court in the land. And I feel it woul take the Minnesota court to rule in favor of Adrian Peterson in the NFL case there to create a split decision ( 2nd vs. 8th districts ) that may entice them to hear it. The chances Brady serves 4 games went up a notch.

(P.S. Not a lawyer, though.)

What's the time frame on Peterson's case?

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

I kind of go back and forth on this. On one hand, as a Colts fan and Patriot hater I think Brady should take his lumps, everyone in the world knows what he did and he knows what he did and when you are caught cheating you should pay a penalty for that.

But the bigger issue here is can an employer punish an employee without due process of the law. And a ruling in the Goodell's favor opens the door to a slippery slope of companies being able to penalize or fire employees without gaining the proper or real evidence.

Let's say a small group of people steal $100,000 from Microsoft. Microsoft conducts and internal investigation and common sense and some circumstantial evidence suggest that the group stole the money and the ring leader was Joe Blow. Now everyone knows Jthis group stole the money, Joe Blow knows he was the ring leader of the group that stole the money but there is no real proof that Joe Blow was involved. Can the company punish Joe Blow without that proof?

So that is why it could possible go to the supreme court... not to see if Brady likes to deflate his balls (we all know he does) but because Goodell may have over stepped his authority acting as investigator, judge, and jury and then enforcing his own punishment.

bababooey · July 13, 2016

2 hours ago, Hoosier said:

Michael Silver just reported on NFLN that Ruth Bader Ginsburg oversees the 2nd Circuit and could grant Brady a stay while the Supreme Court decides whether or not it will even take the case.

No doubt his next move will be to appeal to her for a stay.

I actually wondered this and Florio wrote about it today (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/07/13/ruth-bader-ginsburg-is-the-key-to-tom-bradys-short-term-fate/). She normally would grant a stay but the wrinkle is Brady is an outspoken friend of someone Ginsburg is an outspoken non-fan of and we will leave it at that. You'd think that wouldn't matter though but we will see.

bababooey · July 13, 2016

23 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I kind of go back and forth on this. On one hand, as a Colts fan and Patriot hater I think Brady should take his lumps, everyone in the world knows what he did and he knows what he did and when you are caught cheating you should pay a penalty for that.

But the bigger issue here is can an employer punish an employee without due process of the law. And a ruling in the Goodell's favor opens the door to a slippery slope of companies being able to penalize or fire employees without gaining the proper or real evidence.

Let's say a small group of people steal $100,000 from Microsoft. Microsoft conducts and internal investigation and common sense and some circumstantial evidence suggest that the group stole the money and the ring leader was Joe Blow. Now everyone knows Jthis group stole the money, Joe Blow knows he was the ring leader of the group that stole the money but there is no real proof that Joe Blow was involved. Can the company punish Joe Blow without that proof?

So that is why it could possible go to the supreme court... not to see if Brady likes to deflate his balls (we all know he does) but because Goodell may have over stepped his authority acting as investigator, judge, and jury and then enforcing his own punishment.

You just said common sense and circumstantial evidence existed in your hypothetical situation then said there was no proof so that's kind of confusing. There is usually always a trail in financial crimes once you bring the auditors in after the discovery of something wrong. If employees colluded to conceal evidence then they would be in trouble for the concealing of it and then most likely the fraud would be discovered after. We are also talking about deflating footballs in the NFL and not a financial crime so it is apples and oranges. Also, the CBA allows Goodell to be judge, jury, and executioner. Next time the NFLPA should demand a better deal. Microsoft and Goodell don't follow the same rules.

shakedownstreet · July 13, 2016

the more appeals brady loses, the more appeal brady loses

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

43 minutes ago, bababooey said:

You just said common sense and circumstantial evidence existed in your hypothetical situation then said there was no proof so that's kind of confusing. There is usually always a trail in financial crimes once you bring the auditors in after the discovery of something wrong. If employees colluded to conceal evidence then they would be in trouble for the concealing of it and then most likely the fraud would be discovered after. We are also talking about deflating footballs in the NFL and not a financial crime so it is apples and oranges. Also, the CBA allows Goodell to be judge, jury, and executioner. Next time the NFLPA should demand a better deal. Microsoft and Goodell don't follow the same rules.

I'm not sure how it's confusing, but I apologize that it is. Circumstantial evidence is not proof, common sense is not proof.

And yes, financial crimes are different but it is not impossible to commit a financial crime and not leave a trail that is why people get a way with it and it's not apples and oranges when you are talking about employee vs employer. And you're right about Microsoft and the NFL not having the same rules... I'm sure the employee manual for Microsoft is much more detail and extensive than the CBA in the NFL.

21isSuperman · July 13, 2016

It would be a mockery if this goes to the Supreme Court. I'm no expert in American politics or law, but it seems like a complete waste of resources and a mockery of the system to take something like this to the highest court in the United States

Valpo2004 · July 13, 2016

I don't think he'll get a stay and this isn't going in front of the SCOTUS.

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

21 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

It would be a mockery if this goes to the Supreme Court. I'm no expert in American politics or law, but it seems like a complete waste of resources and a mockery of the system to take something like this to the highest court in the United States

Why? The case this will be presented to go before the Supreme Court is not a case about deflated footballs.

jvan1973 · July 13, 2016

2 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I kind of go back and forth on this. On one hand, as a Colts fan and Patriot hater I think Brady should take his lumps, everyone in the world knows what he did and he knows what he did and when you are caught cheating you should pay a penalty for that.

But the bigger issue here is can an employer punish an employee without due process of the law. And a ruling in the Goodell's favor opens the door to a slippery slope of companies being able to penalize or fire employees without gaining the proper or real evidence.

Let's say a small group of people steal $100,000 from Microsoft. Microsoft conducts and internal investigation and common sense and some circumstantial evidence suggest that the group stole the money and the ring leader was Joe Blow. Now everyone knows Jthis group stole the money, Joe Blow knows he was the ring leader of the group that stole the money but there is no real proof that Joe Blow was involved. Can the company punish Joe Blow without that proof?

So that is why it could possible go to the supreme court... not to see if Brady likes to deflate his balls (we all know he does) but because Goodell may have over stepped his authority acting as investigator, judge, and jury and then enforcing his own punishment.

It depends if the company you work for has a collective bargaining agreement that stipulates the company is judge and jury in discipline. Most companies do not

jskinnz · July 13, 2016

18 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Why? The case this will be presented to go before the Supreme Court is not a case about deflated footballs.

Surprised that there are those who don't get this.

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

46 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

It depends if the company you work for has a collective bargaining agreement that stipulates the company is judge and jury in discipline. Most companies do not

One, you'd be surprised at how many companies have that type of language in their employee manuals. And two, that is the issue and that is why the issue has gone to the district court, to decide if that type of language in a contract is legal and if what Goodell did fell within the guidelines set forth in the CBA or if he overstepped his authority. The 2nd District court said yes... if it goes to the Supreme Court then they may say no or they may say yes.

Just because some lawyer or group of lawyers put something in a contract, even if you sign that contract does not mean the everything in the contract is completely legal, that is why we have a judicial system in this country, it is why the Attorney section in the yellow pages is on of the largest, if not the largest, section, and it is the job of the judge to compare those things to the law and determine if it is within the law.

jskinnz · July 13, 2016

4 hours ago, indyagent17 said:

its pretty sad that this will waste the courts time from hearing more germane cases

The details of what happened in the AFCC game are really not important. There are several issues that have potential application in other areas that could make it a Supreme Court-worthy case.

Nadine · July 13, 2016

I'm curious what all this has cost and if he is footing the bill or if the Players Association is bankrolling this

BrentMc11 · July 13, 2016

1 minute ago, Nadine said:

I'm curious what all this has cost and if he is footing the bill or if the Players Association is bankrolling this

A crazy amount of money being spent I am sure. I think the Players Association is....Kraft? Brady too?

ColtsBlueFL · July 13, 2016

4 hours ago, Superman said:

What's the time frame on Peterson's case?

I'm not really sure, but I would start here to try and locate the answer.

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/rules-of-practice/rules.pdf

Here is last thing I was aware of, but it is way past January-

The Eighth Circuit Appeals Court “strives to issue an opinion within 90 days after oral argument.” This is no guarantee but the Eighth Circuit is known for its timeliness. Based on the most recent study, the Eighth Circuit is the fastest of all the federal appellate courts (there are 13) in issuing a final disposition of a case after a notice of appeal is filed (the average time is six months).

Peterson’s appeal was argued on October 19^th – 90 days after this date is January 17^th. In other words, we can expect the opinion any day now and almost certainly before the March 3^rd Deflategate oral argument.

Did not happen. My feeling,? They'll wait for the SCOTUS to deny or hear the case. If denied, they are under pressure to side with the 2nd district decision for the NFL, and the NFLPA will have to swallow the fact Goodell does have the power throughout the CBA to enforce discipline in the NFL. I do think the League will be open (in CBA negotiation) for outside, 3rd party arbitration hearings. However, the NFL will not budge from reducing the commissioner's Power. Roger had already told Pat Kirwan recently that was "Non Negotiable". Even for a 17th game, etc...

***********************************************************

Reminder to all folks wanting to post here. Things that are OK,

Brady's decision to appeal or not

How the Patriots have/will plan to play if the suspension is served,

Record of the Pats if suspension is served,

whether the Supreme court will hear the case

etc....

What will not be tolerated, or stay as a post on the thread/forum-

Brady to admit his guilt and serve his penalty

any arguments from deflategate (Any! phones, needles nothing!!)

Science or evidence

Posts of cheaters

Conspiracies of the NFL front office and ex Jets NFL offic ers

etc..

************************************************************

Please post wisely and kindly, Thank you.

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

5 minutes ago, Nadine said:

I'm curious what all this has cost and if he is footing the bill or if the Players Association is bankrolling this

I would imagine the players union is the one paying for it. That is why players pay union dues.

Nadine · July 13, 2016

Just now, Coffeedrinker said:

I would imagine the players union is the one paying for it. That is why players pay union dues.

so much :cash:

I'm going back to the lottery dreams thread

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

Just now, Nadine said:

so much

I'm going back to the lottery dreams thread

If you think your rights are being violated how much is that worth to you?

Nadine · July 13, 2016

2 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

If you think your rights are being violated how much is that worth to you?

Rights?

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

Just now, Nadine said:

Rights?

Yes, read through the rest of the the thread, the case is not about deflated footballs.

Nadine · July 13, 2016

Just now, Coffeedrinker said:

Yes, read through the rest of the the thread, the case is not about deflated footballs.

it's about the CBA

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

5 minutes ago, Nadine said:

it's about the CBA

No, it's about if Goodell is overstepping the boundaries spelled out in the CBA.

Nadine · July 13, 2016

Just now, Coffeedrinker said:

No, it's about if Goodell is overstepping the boundaries spelled out in the CBA.

not sure what the difference is. It's about a disagreement over what's in the CBA.

IMO it's more about Goodell's rights than Brady's. NFL feel he has the right and NFLPA feels he does not

ColtsBlueFL · July 13, 2016

3 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

but there is no real proof that Joe Blow was involved. Can the company punish Joe Blow without that proof?

I'll only respond to this because it will demonstrate why the NFL pursued this. Goodell had the power to deliver an equipment violation but for reasons decided to utilize the 'but not limited to' clause (probably because they could not find the culprit right away) and they did what they did (including the Wells report investigation).

Goodell states his standard of proof is more likely than not, which means from everything he knows, which way does the needle point. If it is 50.1% that he probably did it or knew about it, then Goodell could try to administer punishment. And he felt it was ( >50%) and set the penalty. This is the same level of proof as average Joe's/Jane's in civil court (preponderance of the evidence). O.J. Simpson won in criminal court, yet lost in civil court: all based upon amount of proof required in each court case.

Then all the appeals and court sessions etc.... Certainly, this is no longer about making Brady serving 4 games, this is the commissioner's way of defending his authority to act via the CBA in prcedent from Labor Law rulings. Tom wants to play and save his reputation, so he appeals to the very end, and the NFLPA really wants to erode some of Goodell's power before the next CBA negotiation, so they back Brady's appeal. NFL does not want new precedent to undermine what they already negotiated in the previous CBA. THAT is what this is all about now. Not innocence or guilt.

In fact the only things I can think of that might entice a SCOTUS hearing is if Minnesota 8th district rules in Peterson's favor soon, and/or Brady's attorney makes a very strong case there was absolute fraud, deception, misconduct, or serious procedural flaws. Otherwise I feel this case has essentially ended. It's likely it's only a matter of when, not if, Brady serves his 4 games.

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

3 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

I'll only respond to this because it will demonstrate why the NFL pursued this. Goodell had the power to deliver an equipment violation but for reasons decided to utilize the 'but not limited to' clause (probably because they could not find the culprit right away) and they did what they did (including the Wells report investigation).

Goodell states his standard of proof is more likely than not, which means from everything he knows, which way does the needle point. If it is 50.1% that he probably did it or knew about it, then Goodell could try to administer punishment. And he felt it was ( >50%) and set the penalty. This is the same level of proof as average Joe's/Jane's in civil court (preponderance of the evidence). O.J. Simpson won in criminal court, yet lost in civil court: all based upon amount of proof required in each court case.

Then all the appeals and court sessions etc.... Certainly, this is no longer about making Brady serving 4 games, this is the commissioner's way of defending his authority to act via the CBA in prcedent from Labor Law rulings. Tom wants to play and save his reputation, so he appeals to the very end, and the NFLPA really wants to erode some of Goodell's power before the next CBA negotiation, so they back Brady's appeal. NFL does not want new precedent to undermine what they already negotiated in the previous CBA. THAT is what this is all about now. Not innocence or guilt.

In fact the only things I can think of that might entice a SCOTUS hearing is if Minnesota 8th district rules in Peterson's favor soon, and/or Brady's attorney makes a very strong case there was absolute fraud, deception, misconduct, or serious procedural flaws. Otherwise I feel this case has essentially ended. It's likely it's only a matter of when, not if, Brady serves his 4 games.

Thanks ColtBlueFL I enjoyed reading your post.

I am not saying that Brady is correct and Goodell is wrong. I only was responding as to why this case could go before the Supreme Court and how it's not about deflated footballs and gave an example of how it can effect things outside of football. That is all I was trying to accomplish with my post.

ColtsBlueFL · July 13, 2016

10 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I only was responding as to why this case could go before the Supreme Court

As state, ony for absolute fraud, deception, misconduct, or serious procedural flaws.

And they'll only review procedural events, not case evidence... UNLESS, they can in their petition make a great case that Goodell demonstrated misconduct in administering a suspension for that violation. I don't think that will pass the eyeball test, and I don't see where the NFLPA can present a strong case for any of the other reasons.

There's a New York Law Professor coming on soon to SiriusXM radio channel 88 on Moving the Chains (one of my favorite shows!) with Pat Kirwan and Jim Miller. I'll see what he has to say on this and report back.

Coffeedrinker · July 13, 2016

24 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

As state, ony for absolute fraud, deception, misconduct, or serious procedural flaws.

And they'll only review procedural events, not case evidence... UNLESS, they can in their petition make a great case that Goodell demonstrated misconduct in administering a suspension for that violation. I don't think that will pass the eyeball test, and I don't see where the NFLPA can present a strong case for any of the other reasons.

There's a New York Law Professor coming on soon to SiriusXM radio channel 88 on Moving the Chains (one of my favorite shows!) with Pat Kirwan and Jim Miller. I'll see what he has to say on this and report back.

That will be interesting. From the things I've read the case is pretty weak and doesn't really have a chance to get to the Supreme Court. But it will be interesting to hear a legal expert's opinion.

Superman · July 13, 2016

4 hours ago, bababooey said:

I actually wondered this and Florio wrote about it today (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/07/13/ruth-bader-ginsburg-is-the-key-to-tom-bradys-short-term-fate/). She normally would grant a stay but the wrinkle is Brady is an outspoken friend of someone Ginsburg is an outspoken non-fan of and we will leave it at that. You'd think that wouldn't matter though but we will see.

It doesn't matter.

ColtsBlueFL · July 13, 2016

Professor Robert Blecker-

Quick takes from his interview:

SCOTUS and Congress does not normally want Federal courts messing around in arbitration rulings.

Presentation of the case was all wrong, it needs to be Evident Partiality, Bias , or Fraud based.

He then cites Paperworkers v. Misco

NFLPA interest was different than Brady's, thus Brady was improperly represented in earlier cases, courts.

NFLPA - to take power away from Roger Goodell

Brady- to establish innocence, restore his legacy, and play in all games.

But now that it is before the SCOTUS, it's hard to shift gears and bring this all up now. SCOTUS hears only a small % of cases submitted (like 5%), and usually only for Constitutional dimensions, or circuit splits (like if 8th rules in favor of Peterson, as I previously pointed out.)

Blecker had submiited an Amicus Brief on Brady's behalf, but could not get Brady's or NFLPA's attention to heed that and proceed with a separate defense for Brady.

http://thewhitebronco.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Deflategate-Amicus.pdf

Future : Brady will likely lose legally, but Brady could also sue for defamation. Then everything reopened and the 'truth' will come out (he feels no guilt on Brady's part, and no circumstantial evidence credible that will lead to a 50.1% likely to have done so).

So even if this ends with SCOTUS not hearing the case, Brady can make it go on... and on ... and on...

:-(

NFLPA, not so much. :-)

King Colt · July 13, 2016

Sad thing about the coming season is we will hear Brady's name on every single TV and radio broadcast and long, boring nonsense sessions on him and the impact of his absence on the Pats on all pre game and all post game shows until we are sick. Trust me on that.

Sign In

2nd Circut denies Brady's request for rehearing

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites