casmith07
Attorney-at-Zone
- Messages
- 31,538
- Reaction score
- 9,312
First - I am a licensed and practicing attorney with my current practice area focused on administrative law. I examine and handle all sorts of legal matters from FOIA requests to questions of First Amendment rights as they pertain to my organization.
Also, there are other attorneys here that are more seasoned than I am, and I hope that they jump in. I just wanted to provide a little summary of the Brady case and how that could apply to Greg Hardy's potential for an appeal in federal court.
Brady, in short, hinged on notice, or as some people might better understand it, "due process." Essentially, the NFL failed to give Tom Brady proper notice of the potential disciplinary action (four-game suspension) and applied the wrong policy (conduct detrimental is not an equipment violation, according to Judge Berman.) For these reasons, the arbitration process in this case was considered improper. It does not mean, however, that Goodell still cannot continue to act as arbitrator in the future in other instances.
We also have the Adrian Peterson case, where Judge Doty ruled that because the standard of disciplinary action was 2 games at the time of the offense, that was the maximum that Roger Goodell could hand out, similarly because of what players were on notice for at the time.
This leaves me with two outcomes that I think are within the realm of possibility should Greg Hardy decide to pursue his claim against the NFL in federal court by way of the NFLPA:
How could this play out? A lot of posters are talking about how there's "no time". Brady's case was filed and ruled in about 30 days. I think that this ruling helps Hardy's team and the NFLPA push more for a settlement to avoid litigation. The NFL has taken a beating and would probably prefer not to lose in court for a third time in a row in relation to player discipline (although the NFL is quite strange in how they handle these cases).
The other way to play it out would be to file and seek a preliminary injunction and stay of proceedings until the following offseason in order to adequately litigate the case. This would "suspend the suspension" and allow Hardy to play this year, and then revisit the case in full next summer when all parties have adequate time and resources available for an equitable contest in court.
In my personal opinion, Hardy should pursue his case for further reduction of the suspension. Although nothing is for sure in the judicial system, I think it's very likely that his suspension would be reduced to two games based on persuasive law (Peterson). I also think with other creative claims he could potentially have his suspension fully vacated.
I'll answer as many questions as I can here, if anybody has any.
Also, there are other attorneys here that are more seasoned than I am, and I hope that they jump in. I just wanted to provide a little summary of the Brady case and how that could apply to Greg Hardy's potential for an appeal in federal court.
Brady, in short, hinged on notice, or as some people might better understand it, "due process." Essentially, the NFL failed to give Tom Brady proper notice of the potential disciplinary action (four-game suspension) and applied the wrong policy (conduct detrimental is not an equipment violation, according to Judge Berman.) For these reasons, the arbitration process in this case was considered improper. It does not mean, however, that Goodell still cannot continue to act as arbitrator in the future in other instances.
We also have the Adrian Peterson case, where Judge Doty ruled that because the standard of disciplinary action was 2 games at the time of the offense, that was the maximum that Roger Goodell could hand out, similarly because of what players were on notice for at the time.
This leaves me with two outcomes that I think are within the realm of possibility should Greg Hardy decide to pursue his claim against the NFL in federal court by way of the NFLPA:
- Greg Hardy's suspension gets reduced to two games. Similar to Peterson, Greg Hardy was only on notice of a potential of a two game suspension at the time of his alleged misconduct.
- Greg Hardy's suspension is vacated. In light of Brady and in light of Hardy receiving four games (previously reduced from ten), Hardy's suspension is vacated entirely because of improper notice of an impending ten game suspension (even if reduced to four games), which is in excess of the disciplinary standard at the time of the alleged misconduct.
How could this play out? A lot of posters are talking about how there's "no time". Brady's case was filed and ruled in about 30 days. I think that this ruling helps Hardy's team and the NFLPA push more for a settlement to avoid litigation. The NFL has taken a beating and would probably prefer not to lose in court for a third time in a row in relation to player discipline (although the NFL is quite strange in how they handle these cases).
The other way to play it out would be to file and seek a preliminary injunction and stay of proceedings until the following offseason in order to adequately litigate the case. This would "suspend the suspension" and allow Hardy to play this year, and then revisit the case in full next summer when all parties have adequate time and resources available for an equitable contest in court.
In my personal opinion, Hardy should pursue his case for further reduction of the suspension. Although nothing is for sure in the judicial system, I think it's very likely that his suspension would be reduced to two games based on persuasive law (Peterson). I also think with other creative claims he could potentially have his suspension fully vacated.
I'll answer as many questions as I can here, if anybody has any.
