Patriots fans sue to get draft pick back, cite ‘emotional distress’

This topic has 8 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 7 months ago by zn.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

Author

Posts
April 6, 2016 at 7:10 am #41527

zn
Moderator

Patriots fans sue to get draft pick back, cite ‘emotional distress’

http://www.theredzone.org/BlogDescription/tabid/61/EntryId/55786/Patriots-fans-sue-to-get-draft-pick-back–cite–emotional-distress-/Default.aspx

A group of New England Patriots fans are fighting in federal court to get back the draft picks their favorite team lost as part of the ongoing “Deflategate” saga, Bob McGoveryn of the Boston Herald reports.

“This case is brought by New England Patriots fans on behalf of all Patriots fans who believe the New England Patriots professional football team were harmed by the Defendants’ arbitrary and capricious decision to revoke the Patriots first round draft choice in the April 28, 2016 NFL Draft,” the suit, signed by Seth Carey, a Maine attorney, states.

The seven fans, who hail from Florida, New Jersey and Massachusetts, accuse the league and Commissioner Roger Goodell of fraud, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress and racketeering. The Patriots lost the pick, a fourth round pick in 2017 and were fined $1 million after a league investigation found that quarterback Tom Brady was generally aware that footballs may have been partially deflated before the 2015 AFC Championship game.

The fans took aim at that report — dubbed the “Wells Report” — and said it failed to implicate the Patriots and Brady.

“In short, after a three-month, multi-million dollar investigation, actual proof of a plot to deflate footballs was never found,” Carey wrote. “In the

absence of such evidence, it is difficult to understand why Wells found such a plot ‘more probable than not.’”

Team owner Roger Kraft was taken to task as well. The fans accuse him of not fighting hard enough to get the draft pick back.

“Defendant Robert Kraft had remedies to attempt to get Plaintiffs’ draft pick back, but he chose his fellow billionaire owners above the Plaintiffs and fellow fans,” Carey wrote, alleging that the long-time team owner violated the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act. One fan said the Deflategate saga has caused a rift in his own home. Todd Orsatti, a season-ticket holder, said his daughter is now bitterly jaded because of the whole ordeal.”

April 6, 2016 at 8:35 am #41533

zn
Moderator

Todd Orsatti, a season-ticket holder, said his daughter is now bitterly jaded because of the whole ordeal.

Oh no.

April 6, 2016 at 2:13 pm #41542

snowman
Participant

This was posted on April 6, so I assume it is real or just the story line for the next episode of “Better Call Saul”.

April 6, 2016 at 4:08 pm #41547

zn
Moderator

snowman wrote:

This was posted on April 6, so I assume it is real or just the story line for the next episode of “Better Call Saul”.

It’s real.

.

April 6, 2016 at 5:44 pm #41549

InvaderRam
Moderator

kudos to those pats fans. i hope they lose.

April 9, 2016 at 3:06 pm #41683

zn
Moderator

Judge refuses to restore Patriots’ first-round draft pick

Mike Florio

Judge refuses to restore Patriots’ first-round draft pick

A group of Patriots fans has sued the NFL in an effort to restore the first-round draft pick that was confiscated as part of the #Deflategate punishment. A judge has quickly chimed in regarding an attempt to get the pick back in time for this month’s draft.

Via the Boston Herald, Judge F. Dennis Saylor has summarily denied the request to replenish the pick pending the outcome of the litigation.

“After reviewing the complaint, it appears highly unlikely that plaintiffs will succeed on the merits of any of their claims,” Judge Saylor wrote.

It was as dramatic a slam dunk as a court can deliver.

“The Court is denying plaintiffs’ motion without the benefit of an evidentiary hearing or an opposition brief,” the order explains. “However, the federal courts are courts of limited resources, funded by the taxpayers, and it would not be a prudent expenditure of those resources to permit the motion to progress to the hearing stage.”

Judge Saylor’s assessment of the lawsuit hints strongly at the possibility of an award of litigation costs and other penalties against Seth Carey, the Maine lawyer who signed the civil complaint. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure prohibit frivolous filings, allowing for a wide range of sanctions.

Although the courts rarely dirty their hands by meting out so-called Rule 11 punishments, Judge Saylor’s initial reaction to this specific lawsuit suggests that a much stronger reaction could be coming later.

April 9, 2016 at 5:43 pm #41687

Agamemnon
Participant

What kind of penalties? Can the judge take away more draft choices? 😉

Agamemnon

April 9, 2016 at 7:10 pm #41689

bnw
Blocked

InvaderRam wrote:

kudos to those pats fans. i hope they lose.

LOL

The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

Sprinkles are for winners.

April 9, 2016 at 7:29 pm #41690

zn
Moderator

zn wrote:

Judge Saylor’s assessment of the lawsuit hints strongly at the possibility of an award of litigation costs and other penalties against Seth Carey, the Maine lawyer who signed the civil complaint.

Although the courts rarely dirty their hands by meting out so-called Rule 11 punishments, Judge Saylor’s initial reaction to this specific lawsuit suggests that a much stronger reaction could be coming later.

Agamemnon wrote:

What kind of penalties? Can the judge take away more draft choices?

The punishments, which the article writer speculates about (in a very editorial way), would be aimed at the lawyer.

from the wiki

In the United States federal court system, certain types of conduct are sanctionable under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 11 provides for sanctions against the attorney or client for harassment, frivolous arguments, or a lack of factual investigation. The purpose of sanctions is deterrent, not punitive.

In law, frivolous litigation is the practice of starting or carrying on lawsuits that, due to their lack of legal merit, have little to no chance of being won. The term does not include cases that may be lost due to other matters not related to legal merit. While colloquially, a person may term a lawsuit to be frivolous if he or she personally finds a claim to be absurd, in legal usage “frivolous litigation” consists of a claim or defense that is presented where the party (or the party’s legal counsel) had reason to know that the claim or defense was manifestly insufficient or futile. The fact that a claim is lost does not imply that it was frivolous.
Author

Posts