Posts Tagged ‘football’

New Orleans fans file suit over Saints loss

“Stuck between anger and depression over Sunday’s debacle in the Dome, a few dyspeptic New Orleans Saints fans have settled into an equally predictable stage of grief: litigation.” Among the claimed damages: “loss of enjoyment of life” [John Simerman, The Advocate]

Appellate lawyer Raffi Melkonian, on Twitter, writes: “Let me handicap this for everyone — this case has literally 0 chance of success. 0%. 100% minus 100%. It is dead on arrival. It is pushing up the daisies. A Court would rather deal with 200 sovereign citizen petitions than grant such relief.” More: Michael McCann, Sports Illustrated.

Liability roundup

Liability roundup

Constitutional law roundup

  • Even if troublesome for other reasons, discussion of nominees’ religious beliefs does not violate the Constitution’s Religious Test Clause [my post at Secular Right]
  • I’m quoted toward the end of this report: Congress rather than courts likely to get ultimate say on defining “emoluments” [NPR with Peter Overby, audio and related article, earlier]
  • Convention of the States? Federalist Society panel video with Thomas Brinkman, Jennifer Brunner, David Forte, Matt Huffman, Larry Obhof, Matthew Byrne [earlier on Article V conventions]
  • Supreme Court opened — and should now close — “dual sovereignty” exception to rule against double jeopardy [Ilya Shapiro, Cato]
  • Encyclopedia of Libertarianism, 2008, has articles on the U.S. Constitution by David Mayer and on the rule of law by Norman Barry;
  • Following big First Amendment win in Slants case Matal v. Tam, feds drop effort to void trademark of Washington Redskins [Ilya Shapiro, Eugene Volokh, earlier]

“After N.F.L. Concussion Settlement, Feeding Frenzy of Lawyers and Lenders”

Following the biggest settlement in sports history, on behalf of National Football League players who were not given enough warning of the dangers of concussions and brain injury, a small army of legal, financial, claims-filing, and medical advisers are working hard to pitch retired players on their services. But “the fact that many players are cognitively impaired and may struggle to understand the terms of the services offered to them has raised alarm among player advocates, legal ethicists and the lawyers for the players who sued the N.F.L.” [Ken Belson, New York Times]

Most of the claim-service providers require players to agree to share 15 percent or more of anything they receive in return for helping them with a process that the providers portray, in stark terms, as unduly complicated. They also do not always tell players that they can call court-appointed experts to receive free advice on how to file a claim, or that they can visit doctors who will provide a free neurological exam.

Some lawyers have hosted dinners for former players at steakhouses to get them to sign up. Others have promised to get players appointments with doctors who will write diagnoses that make their medical conditions look worse than they are, according to players who have received pitches from some of the companies.

Side note: Ira Stoll has a comment about the Times’s use of the phrase “largely unregulated.”

June 28 roundup

  • Unlike some other states, Massachusetts has not passed a law making it unlawful to encourage suicide; confidante nonetheless convicted of involuntary manslaughter over texts encouraging fellow teenager to do that [New York Times, NPR]
  • New Emoluments Clause lawsuits against President Trump vary from previous pattern, still face uphill battle [Victor Li, ABA Journal; earlier]
  • “Putting occupational licensing on the Maryland reform agenda” [my new Free State Notes]
  • “Interpreting State Constitutions,” judges’ panel discussion with Judith French, Jeffrey Sutton, Steve Yarbrough, Matt Kemp [Ohio Federalist Society chapters]
  • SCOTUS closes a door, and rightly so, in the long-running Chevron-Ecuador-Donziger saga [Michael Krauss]
  • Green Bay fan sues Chicago Bears over “no opposing team gear at pregame warmups” rule [WDEZ, Howard Wasserman/Prawfs]

Fee scrimmage in NFL concussion settlement

“The $1 billion NFL concussion settlement — nearly six years in the making yet still to deliver a penny to former players and their families for brain injuries stemming from football — is revealing the underbelly of the legal system to former players and their families. … Two dozen wives of former players recently sent a plea to the judge overseeing the case, asking her to address concerns that legal fees will be cutting heavily into money that was supposed to go their families. They cited lawyers charging ‘exorbitant’ retainer fees to players and their families despite the same lawyers being eligible to collect from a $112.5 million fund set aside to pay attorneys who worked on the case.” [ESPN]