Oral Argument for Zeke's case 10/2

[Thomas82]

Jerry's comments have been very interesting the past couple of weeks. Last week he was very supportive of Goodell. However, yesterday he denied the reports that the extension was imminent.

All I know is that some heads need to roll after this mess is finally over.

 

[ThreeandOut]

There's some thought that Friel will be the sacrificial lamb.

 

[pugilist]

There's some thought that Friel will be the sacrificial lamb.

selfishly, this would placate me as a fan

might not be enough for Zeke though

 

[Broges74]

look up fundamental fairness. Then you will realize how wrong you are.

I did not say it was right, just that it is inevitable.

 

[TonyS]

Everyone that pays for Sunday Ticket, buys any NFL merchandise or attends games is helping to pay for the NFL to carry on this charade. Think about where your money is going before you lay down those greenbacks.

 

[TheHerd]

I did not say it was right, just that it is inevitable.

He meant legally wrong.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I think Zeke will get the injunction and play all year, what I am worried about is next year. I fear that the courts will eventually rule in NFL's favor like they did with Brady.

 

[diefree666]

There's some thought that Friel will be the sacrificial lamb.

Only if Goodell and the NFL front office want to put this behind them. I see no sign of that yet.

 

[drawandstrike]

Just to clarify: an *appeal hearing* is not an opportunity to RETRY the entire case because you didn't like the ruling the judge in the lower court gave you.

An appeal hearing is where you appear before a panel and argue the judge in the other court reached a WRONG DECISION and the burden of proof is on you to cite *reasons* that show the judge made an incorrect decision.

This is often done using legal precedents and case law. If you can demonstrate to the appeals court the judge in your case DIDN'T apply legal precedents from other similar cases or that he/she ignored relevant case law, you have a good shot at getting a reversal.

Here's what still stuns me about the NFL's appeal hearing scheduled for Oct 2: I haven't seen ANYTHING that demonstrates they are going to appeal to some legal precedent that Judge Mazzant ignored or case law that he refused to apply to his ruling.

Going into the appeals court to try to re-argue the case *without* being able to cite any real concrete procedural errors or case law mistake made by the judge in the lower court can end up getting you on the end of some brutal questioning by an appeals panel that thinks you're wasting it's time.

If transcripts of this hearing come out, I'd look for question from the judges on the panel pointedly asking the NFL's lawyers what *specific* procedural errors they think Judge Mazzant committed, or what *specific* case law do they think Mazzant ignored or discounted in reaching his decision.

The NFL's lawyers had better have some good answers ready, because if not, this hearing could get ugly quickly.

 

[Cowboys22]

Just to clarify: an *appeal hearing* is not an opportunity to RETRY the entire case because you didn't like the ruling the judge in the lower court gave you.

An appeal hearing is where you appear before a panel and argue the judge in the other court reached a WRONG DECISION and the burden of proof is on you to cite *reasons* that show the judge made an incorrect decision.

This is often done using legal precedents and case law. If you can demonstrate to the appeals court the judge in your case DIDN'T apply legal precedents from other similar cases or that he/she ignored relevant case law, you have a good shot at getting a reversal.

Here's what still stuns me about the NFL's appeal hearing scheduled for Oct 2: I haven't seen ANYTHING that demonstrates they are going to appeal to some legal precedent that Judge Mazzant ignored or case law that he refused to apply to his ruling.

Going into the appeals court to try to re-argue the case *without* being able to cite any real concrete procedural errors or case law mistake made by the judge in the lower court can end up getting you on the end of some brutal questioning by an appeals panel that thinks you're wasting it's time.

If transcripts of this hearing come out, I'd look for question from the judges on the panel pointedly asking the NFL's lawyers what *specific* procedural errors they think Judge Mazzant committed, or what *specific* case law do they think Mazzant ignored or discounted in reaching his decision.

The NFL's lawyers had better have some good answers ready, because if not, this hearing could get ugly quickly.

The NFL is only asking the 5th Circuit to rule that Mazzant lacked jurisdiction because the case was filed before Henderson ruled. That is it. That is all the 5th Circuit asked both sides to address because that's the only thing they can really rule on. Mazzant sufficiently laid out an airtight case that Zeke was denied a fundamentally fair process. They will never overrule that finding. The only issue they have to decide is whether or not to throw the case out due to being filed prematurely.

 

[pugilist]

getting juicy

 

[Broges74]

He meant legally wrong.

I know. I will try to be more clear next time.

 

[drawandstrike]

The NFL is only asking the 5th Circuit to rule that Mazzant lacked jurisdiction because the case was filed before Henderson ruled. That is it. That is all the 5th Circuit asked both sides to address because that's the only thing they can really rule on. Mazzant sufficiently laid out an airtight case that Zeke was denied a fundamentally fair process. They will never overrule that finding. The only issue they have to decide is whether or not to throw the case out due to being filed prematurely.

Yes, the NFL *made this argument* in Mazzant's court. How do people not grasp this? The NFL's lawyers argued to Judge Mazzant he *shouldn't even be hearing this case* since Henderson had not yet made his ruling on Elliott's suspension, and therefore Elliott's legal team should *not* have been allowed to file suit in Texas.

The NFL is now....get this!....going to make the SAME argument before the 5th Circuit Appeals court.

Go back and read my post again. The NFL's lawyers don't seem to be preparing to argue Mazzant made a wrong ruling based on a procedural error or neglecting to take case law into account before rendering his judgment. An appeal hearing is *not* for retrying the case. The 'premature filing' argument was practically the entire NFL case in the lower court.

They are going to get massacred for basically trying to re-argue the central point of the case they presented in the lower court without being able to specifically point to anything to appeal to in order to get a reversal.

 

[pugilist]

 

[drawandstrike]

Kessler lays out a compelling case here why the NY filing by the NFL should be dismissed by the NY court.

 

[TheHerd]

Kessler lays out a compelling case here why the NY filing by the NFL should be dismissed by the NY court.

Haha, a NY court going against something the NFL wants? That would really be something.

 

[drawandstrike]

In case you just want the crux of the matter, here's what Kessler & the NFLPA are arguing as to why the NY court should dismiss the NFL's filing:

 

[Ghost12]

Kessler lays out a compelling case here why the NY filing by the NFL should be dismissed by the NY court.

If there is one thing courts are good at, it's doing nothing while time passes. I would be amazed if the NY court rules on this prior to seeing what CA5 says in their appeal hearing on (I believe) 10/2.

 

[pugilist]

 

[pugilist]

wonder if Graves is aware of the black athlete / white woman comment alleged to have been said by TT