Pats and Belichick being sued (1 Viewer)

[The Ref]

This is just a ploy to motivate the attorney general.

 

[831hoops]

Worst lawsuit ever.

Worse than the McDonalds/Hot Coffee suit?

yes

 

[PMENFAN]

I don't think this thing has a leg to stand on, but it is pretty rediculous that the NFL destroyed the evidence. That seems rediculous.

Are you a lawyer ?

Nope, not a sheriff either, but this is what you call a frivolous lawsuit. HOlding, or PI is 'cheating' as well. But, under league rules, they are punished. This falls into the same arena. Or, are you suggesting teams should be able to sue for losing a game on a penalty that was miscalled? Hilarious, but foolish.

 

[uncleleo]

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/footbal...ticleid=1034875

 

[Texican]

Jets Ticket Holder Sues

Jets ticket holder sues Patriots and coach Belichick, seeks damages of more than $184 million

NEW YORK (AP) -- A New York Jets season-ticket holder filed a class-action lawsuit Friday against the New England Patriots and coach Bill Belichick for "deceiving customers."

The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Newark, N.J., by Carl Mayer of Princeton Township, N.J., stems from the Patriots being caught illegally videotaping signals from Jets coaches in New England's 38-14 season-opening win Sept. 9.

ADVERTISEMENT

"They violated the integrity of the game," Mayer's attorney, Bruce Afran, told The Associated Press. "This is a way of punishing Belichick and the Patriots."

Mayer is seeking more than $184 million in damages for Jets ticket holders.

Belichick was fined $500,000 by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, and the team was fined $250,000 for violating a league rule that prohibits clubs from using a video camera on the sidelines for any purpose -- including recording signals relayed to opposing players on the field. New England also must forfeit a first-round draft pick next year if it makes the playoffs or a second- and third-rounder if it doesn't.

"They were deceiving customers," said the 48-year-old Mayer. "You can't deceive customers."

The lawsuit maintained that because other teams found illegal videotaping by the defendants, Jets ticket holders should be compensated for all games played in Giants Stadium between the Jets and Patriots since Belichick became head coach in 2000.

The two calculated that because customers paid $61.6 million to watch eight "fraudulent" games, they're entitled to triple that amount -- or $184.8 million -- in compensation under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

"How many times have the Patriots done this? We find it hard to believe they did it just once," Mayer said. "We just want to get to the truth of the matter of what the Patriots did to the Jets. I think the ticket holders are genuinely concerned about it. This is a type of misrepresentation."

Patriots spokesman Stacey James declined to comment on the lawsuit.

Mayer and Afran, who consider themselves public interest lawyers, have been thorns in the side of New Jersey politicians for years, filing lawsuits and demanding investigations to advance their grievances. They are well known in the state but generally have had little success in their causes.

Both have lost bids for elected offices, and Mayer once served as a presidential campaign adviser to Ralph Nader.

Their demand in March for a probe of Gov. Jon S. Corzine's gifts to a former girlfriend was rejected by a federal prosecutor. In 2006, a judge vetoed their effort to block Corzine's appointment of Rep. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., to fill the governor's seat in the U.S. Senate.

They also failed to get a court to order a special election to replace Gov. James E. McGreevey when he resigned in 2004.

Now, they're taking on the Patriots.

Their latest lawsuit asserted that the secret videotaping violated the contractual "expectations and rights" of Jets ticket holders "to observe an honest match played in compliance with all laws and regulations."

The actions of Belichick and the Patriots violated federal and state racketeering laws, as well as the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and New Jersey Deceptive Business Practices Act, according to the lawsuit.

"Having been a lifelong Jets fan, as soon as I heard this, I was completely outraged," Mayer said. "The NFL just slapped them on the wrist. I'm a consumer lawyer, and this is consumer fraud."

Associated Press Writer Jeffrey Gold in Newark, N.J., contributed to this report.

 

[-Crippler-]

already posted

 

[GreekFreak]

According to the Associated Press, the pair are well-known if generally unsuccessful in New Jersey for filing suits.

Couple of attention seeking whores

 

[Routilla]

That's gonna bump the line another 3 points in NE's favor when they play again. Expect a thorough rout.

 

[heidbrink]

Kind of odd that the NFL destroyed all the evidence..............

Ya, kinda weird, huh ?Hopefully this gets enough pressure on them to get Congress involved, we need to know the whole story, and I don't believe we are getting it right now.

Because with all thats going on in the world, I want our country's leaders working on the NFL taping signals issue. Definitely a good use of governement time.

They brought baseball in front of congress over steroids and th NFL in over retired players health care, why wouldn't they want to investigate possible cheating in the NFL ?

Did they break any laws?

Fraud, racketering...What if someone had knowledge that the Pats had an advatage and was using the info to bet on games ?? I'm not claiming that it true, but that would be quite serious

What if? A lawsuit on behalf of fans that feel cheated? There is no broken law here. They broke a league rule, got caught and got punished by the authority ( in this case, the league ). Why is it so hard to see the difference? This is a ridiculous, frivilous lawsuit that ties up courts and makes lawyers rich. If this is what you think is the right direction to go. well I guess thats your priviledge.

I, for one, will try to keep a bit of perspective when it comes to games and try to enjoy the onfield product. As for grassy knoll conspiricy, I'll leave that to you. :X

I'm not so sure there is not a broken law here, if the league was aware of long term cheating, and destroyed evidence that proved it....

Just so we're clear... cheating at a game is NOT AGAINST THE LAW!!!!!Got it? Good. Moving on.

I believe that is the crux of the question now isn't it? They broke the rules obviously but did they break any laws. The suit is seeking "compensation under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act". Everyone is entitled to their opinions but unless you are judging this case you are not in a position to make that determination. I do not believe it is in the Pat's or NFL's interest to be a flippant about this situation as you seem to be.

 

[Doug B]

The issue to me doesn't appear to be breaking league rules. I don't believe that's why the l;awsuit is being brought up.

The issue seems to be more or less consumer fraud: purporting to put out fair competition as a product, but offering more or less "rigged" games through Belichick's video-tape shenanigans.

That said, this case has no legs and will be summarily dismissed. It would help lots if the guys bringing these cases up weren't famous for trumping up frivolous cases.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

No, I care about the integrity of the games I am watching, and if other teams are doing it I hope they get busted as well.

Do some research on the 31 other teams in this league. What you find may disturb your faith in the integrity of the game. While you're at it, look up the words naive, sanctimonious and hypocritical.

 

[Gr00vus]

Worst lawsuit ever.

Worse than the McDonalds/Hot Coffee suit?

Get educated.

Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of her Ford Probe, and her grandson Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. She placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap.

.

.

Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin as she sat in the puddle of hot liquid for over 90 seconds, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.[8] Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[9] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. Two years of treatment followed.

.

.

Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for US$20,000 to cover her medical costs, which were $11,000, but the company offered only $800. When McDonald's refused to raise its offer, Liebeck retained Texas attorney Reed Morgan. Morgan filed suit in a New Mexico District Court accusing McDonald's of "gross negligence" for selling coffee that was "unreasonably dangerous" and "defectively manufactured." McDonald's refused Morgan's offer to settle for $90,000.

.

.

Morgan offered to settle for $300,000, and a mediator suggested $225,000 just before trial, but McDonald's refused these final pre-trial attempts to settle.

.

.

McDonald's required franchises to serve coffee at 180-190 degrees Fahrenheit (82-88 degrees Celsius). At that temperature, the coffee would cause a third-degree burn in two to seven seconds. Stella Liebeck's attorney argued that coffee should never be served hotter than 140 degrees Fahrenheit (60 degrees Celsius), and that a number of other establishments served coffee at a substantially lower temperature than McDonald's.

.

.

Other documents obtained from McDonald's showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burnt by McDonald's coffee to varying degrees of severity, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000.

.

.

McDonald's quality control manager, Christopher Appleton, testified that this number of injuries was insufficient to cause the company to evaluate its practices... The plaintiffs argued that Appleton conceded that McDonald's coffee would burn the mouth and throat if consumed when served.

.

.

Applying the principles of comparative negligence, the jury found that McDonald's was 80% responsible for the incident and Liebeck was 20% at fault. Though there was a warning on the coffee cup, the jury decided that the warning was neither large enough nor sufficient. They awarded Liebeck US$200,000 in compensatory damages, which was then reduced by 20% to $160,000. In addition, they awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages. The jurors apparently arrived at this figure from Morgan's suggestion to penalize McDonald's for one or two days worth of coffee revenues, which were about $1.35 million per day.[4]

.

.

The judge reduced punitive damages to $480,000, three times the compensatory amount, for a total of $640,000.

Offtopic in the shark pool - I'm lovin' it.

 

[Gr00vus]

By the way, unless there's some Zapruder film lying around for this thing, there's no way these guys have a shot at winning this. I think they probably know that too.

The gamble is, how much of a smear will the NFL be willing to take - will they settle to shut this thing up and if so when and for how much?

It'll be interesting to see how loud this thing gets. I'd imagine there will be plenty of unhappy Jets fans (are there any happy Jets fans anymore?) who will hop on this bandwagon.

 

[zoonation]

:inbestdonkingvoice:

"Only in America!"

 

[Aaronl5]

I think Jet fans this season are trying to out do philly fans as the biggest scum bags around.

 

[Road Warriors]

Kind of odd that the NFL destroyed all the evidence..............

Ya, kinda weird, huh ?Hopefully this gets enough pressure on them to get Congress involved, we need to know the whole story, and I don't believe we are getting it right now.

Because with all thats going on in the world, I want our country's leaders working on the NFL taping signals issue. Definitely a good use of governement time.

They brought baseball in front of congress over steroids and th NFL in over retired players health care, why wouldn't they want to investigate possible cheating in the NFL ?

Did they break any laws?

Fraud, racketering...What if someone had knowledge that the Pats had an advatage and was using the info to bet on games ?? I'm not claiming that it true, but that would be quite serious

What if? A lawsuit on behalf of fans that feel cheated? There is no broken law here. They broke a league rule, got caught and got punished by the authority ( in this case, the league ). Why is it so hard to see the difference? This is a ridiculous, frivilous lawsuit that ties up courts and makes lawyers rich. If this is what you think is the right direction to go. well I guess thats your priviledge.

I, for one, will try to keep a bit of perspective when it comes to games and try to enjoy the onfield product. As for grassy knoll conspiricy, I'll leave that to you.

I'm not so sure there is not a broken law here, if the league was aware of long term cheating, and destroyed evidence that proved it....

Just so we're clear... cheating at a game is NOT AGAINST THE LAW!!!!!Got it? Good. Moving on.

I believe that is the crux of the question now isn't it? They broke the rules obviously but did they break any laws. The suit is seeking "compensation under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act". Everyone is entitled to their opinions but unless you are judging this case you are not in a position to make that determination. I do not believe it is in the Pat's or NFL's interest to be a flippant about this situation as you seem to be.

While you speak to the language of the lawsuit, the thread above was regarding the need for Congress to get involved here, bringing up baseball's steriod issue being called in front of Congress as an example. The point of breaking laws in this case is related to that topic, not the merits of the lawsuit. Steriods are illegal in society, so the impact goes beyond the game. In this case, videotaping is not illegal in society, so the impact stays within the league. I am not a legal analyst, but coming from a common sense viewpoint, it would seem to me that a Consumer Fraud charge in this case is more than a stretch.All that being said, I can't tell if you believe this frivilous lawsuit brought about by attention seeking lawyers has merit or not. I fall on the side of NOT.

 

[Serenity Now]

I imagine this is why Goodell had everything destroyed. If other tapes started popping up you could have dozens of these lawsuits.

Exactly

Its too bad the lawsuit wasn't filed sooner. He wouldn't have been able to destroy the tapes and we would probably have been able to see what was on them.

They showed it on tv here in the Boston area. Just a handheld camcorder shot of the defensive coach giving signals, then the camera pans to the clock, rinse and repeat. Just showed the signal and the scoreboard, not the play on the field. You see, the tape itself would have been pretty useless within the game in question, since someone would have to sit with the video, still shots and other video of the game and match up the signals to the plays, etc. It's commonly done throughout the league, although not from the sidelines.

 

[baymen]

Speaking for myself, as a Jets fan, I find this lawsuit ridiculous.

 

[fatness]

They showed it on tv here in the Boston area. Just a handheld camcorder shot of the defensive coach giving signals, then the camera pans to the clock, rinse and repeat. Just showed the signal and the scoreboard, not the play on the field. You see, the tape itself would have been pretty useless within the game in question, since someone would have to sit with the video, still shots and other video of the game and match up the signals to the plays, etc. It's commonly done throughout the league, although not from the sidelines.

After that tape was turned over to the NFL, the Patriots were ordered by Goodell to turn over all other evidence they had of their spying on other teams. They did so, the NFL received it, and the NFL destroyed it. There was more than just that one tape.

 

[DropKick]

On the surface, this appears to be garbage and kind of embarrassing for the Jets. I mean... how whiny can one get?

But, on second thought, there could be some $ in this for me. I'm thinking about filing a suit against the Jets for putting an inferior team on the field. I go to games to see talented, high level competition. You can't pass that team off as an NFL caliber franchise. This is consumer fraud as its worst!

When do I get my check?

 

[Serenity Now]

They showed it on tv here in the Boston area. Just a handheld camcorder shot of the defensive coach giving signals, then the camera pans to the clock, rinse and repeat. Just showed the signal and the scoreboard, not the play on the field. You see, the tape itself would have been pretty useless within the game in question, since someone would have to sit with the video, still shots and other video of the game and match up the signals to the plays, etc. It's commonly done throughout the league, although not from the sidelines.

After that tape was turned over to the NFL, the Patriots were ordered by Goodell to turn over all other evidence they had of their spying on other teams. They did so, the NFL received it, and the NFL destroyed it. There was more than just that one tape.

I'm fully aware of that. It was tapes of other teams from other games. Same stuff, different day. I'm not sure which is funnier to me -- Belichick's Nixonian paranoia that leads him to do things like this, or the paranoia around the league that there's something deeply evil afoot.

 

[mightyeskimo]

Kind of odd that the NFL destroyed all the evidence..............

Ya, kinda weird, huh ?Hopefully this gets enough pressure on them to get Congress involved, we need to know the whole story, and I don't believe we are getting it right now.

Get over it.

 

[Workhorse]

For my first witness, I'd call to the stand Jimmy Johnson.Here's a transcript of his interview on WFAN this past week:

Q: How about the spying thing Jimmy. You're a coach does that bother you what Belichick did?JJ: Oh please. I've said it on our show. Eighteen years ago a scout for the chiefs told me what they did, and he said what you need to do is just take your camera and you go and zoom in on the signal caller and that way you can sync it up. The problem is that if they're not on the press box side you can't do it from the press box, you have to do it from the sideline. This was 18 years ago.Q: You think the NFL came down too hard on them?JJ: No, no, I said it on the show. He was wrong for doing it for the simple reason that the league knew this was going on not ust in New England but around the league. And the league sent out the memorandum to all of the teams saying you cannot do this. And os that's when Bill Belichick was wrong. After he got the memorandum saying don't do it any more, he did it.Q: Did you ever steal signals?JJ: Oh in a heartbeat, yeah. Yes I did.Q: Via video, Jimmy? Or no?JJ: Oh yeah, I did it with video and so did a lot of other teams in the league. Just to make sure that you could study it and take your time, because you're going to play the other team the second time around. But a lot of coaches did it, this was commonplace. Q: But did you do it by taping the signal caller?JJ: Yeah.Q: Oh you did.JJ: That's what I'm saying. I was saying one of Marty Schottenheimers scouts, Mark Hatley, who has passed away now, Mark told me that's how they did it, and Howard Mudd their offensive line coach with Kansas City, who now coaches for Tony Dungy, he was the best in the entire league at stealing signals.Q: Where'd you put your guy who was videotaping? Where was he?JJ: My guy was up with my camera crew in the press box. So you'd just put an extra camera up with your camera crew in the press box who zoomed in on the signal callers. That's the best way to do it, but anyway you can't always do that because the press box camera crew might be on the same side as the opposing team. If they're on the same side as the opposing team that's when you need to do it from the sideline. Q: Also with some operations and some teams they have equipment set up within the stadium so they can just run it ack and check what's going on during the game anyway.JJ: Oh I'll tell you [laughing] some of the stuff that goes on it's almost comical.Q: Jimmy don't you think using contraptions like that goes against the spirit of football?JJ: Well that's why the league put in that you can't use any electronic equipment, during the game, locker room, press box, sideline, this type of thing. They ruled against it and again that's why Bill Belichick was wrong.Q: How much of an advantage would it give them?JJ: Well you know Bradshaw and I had a talk back and forth on this. I did it a few times and then I stopped doing it because I didn't think we got much out of it to be honest with you. But games are so close... If it gives you one single play in the ballgame it might be the difference. But again, he was wrong for doing it after the memorandum was sent out by the league, because the league knew that other teams were doing it. And so... it was a commonplace thing though.

 

[Green and Gold]

I can just imagine what would happen if this went through. All the teams in Denver's division would get their fans to sue for the season where they fudged the salary cap. Heck, in the spirit of competitive equality, you could even start suing when players get suspended for steroid use.

 

[831hoops]

The NFL needs to set a precedent here and counter sue for exorbitant legal fees to prevent this type of grandstanding shenanigans in the future.

 

[Sheriff66]

This updated from PFT yesterday

LAWSUIT PREVENTS PATS FROM MOVING ON

At the conclusion of paragraph 18 of the class-action lawsuit filed against the New England Patriots and coach Bill Belichick in the wake of the cheating scandal that erupted on September 10, the formal complaint quotes Belichick's statement of three days later, after the league's punishment was announced: "With tonight's resolution, I will not be offering any further comments on this matter. We are moving on with our preparations for Sunday's game."

And the next sentence of the initial filing says it all. "The New York Jets ticket-holders who have purchased tickets to watch the Jets play the New England Patriots are not willing to move on."

The full text of the lawsuit appears on a blog maintained by the plaintiff, who also is a New Jersey lawyer. The paperwork reads like any other document that launches a civil lawsuit. Though it's too early to tell whether any of the various legal theories (tortious interference with contractual relations, common law fraud, deceptive business practices, federal and state racketeering, violation of ticket-holder rights as third-party beneficiaries, breach of contract, and consumer fraud) will survive an aggressive and comprehensive effort to dispose of the case before guys like Belichick and Matt Estrella and Roger Goodell are asked to swear and affirm that their testimony is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, the mere existence of the lawsuit forces the team, and the league, to re-open matters that had been proclaimed closed.

That fact, standing alone, makes this lawsuit newsworthy, and significant. The team wants to move on, but the team can't move on. Not until the lawsuit is over and all appeals are exhausted.

Also, even if the Pats prevail on a motion to dismiss all eight counts of the complaint on the basis that each theory fails to state a claim on which any relief can be granted, the Pats will have to reduce to writing an argument that, from a P.R. perspective, might be less than ideal.

Basically, the Pats' legal team will write in the brief in support of the motion to dismiss that folks who buy tickets to pro football games have no recourse, under any circumstances, regardless of the existence and extent of cheating. Great care will need to be taken in the crafting of the sentences, because it will be easy for folks in the media to lift segments of the brief that, when considered out of context, won't reflect favorably on the whole customer satisfaction side of the business.

The Patriots also might try in the motion to dismiss to argue that the cheating provided no meaningful benefit, and that the common nature of the practice required teams like the Jets to take steps to shield their defensive signals. But injecting such facts at the outset of the case makes the motion to dismiss something other than a motion to dismiss, and it will invite an argument that formal discovery (i.e., depositions of witnesses and written requested for information and documents) should be allowed before any ruling is made as to whether the case may proceed.

And, as we mentioned last night, the prospect of engaging in discovery in this case is a bit more troubling than in a normal civil action because all of the evidence of cheating has been surrendered by the Pats to the league office, which then destroyed it.

Moving forward, the Patriots and Belichick will have 30 days to respond to the complaint after being formally served, presumably through the New Jersey Secretary of State. The defendants' first move undoubtedly will be a motion to dismiss. Discovery will be permitted to commence after the parties engage in a Rule 26(f) conference, which typically occurs a couple of months after the lawsuit is filed. At some point after the Rule 26(f) conference the Court will enter a scheduling order that contains various dates and deadlines, including (most importantly) the day on which the trial will begin.

Another important portion in the process will be the filing of a motion by the plaintiff to certify the class. It's a necessary step in class actions; before the case can proceed as a class action, the Court has to agree that the legal requirements of class treatment are met. Defendants often oppose motions to certify aggressively, since preventing certification essentially destroys the class action.

So this case will be around for awhile. And we'll be keeping an eye on the developments. And we'll likely be boring all of the non-lawyers in the audience with some of the details from time to time.

 

[Whizzinator]

I know Florio is a lawyer, but I really question that analysis. The Pats lawyers and the NFL lawyers will be spending some energy on this, but I seriously doubt anyone in football ops is going to spend more than five minutes on this. At most, they'll be told 'don't do anything to any remaining files' and told to forget about it while they engage in motions practice.

I also think this thing has a better chance of resulting in sanctions and a nasty judicial opinion targeting the plaintiff than it does in actually getting anywhere on the theories put forward.

 

[Horses Mouth]

I'd like to form a FBG class action suit against New England, Belichick, and Kraft on behalf of all the other owners of the NYJ DEF squad who lost that week. Cheaters!!!!

 

[twitch]

previous poster had it dead on. That guy oughta be suing the Jets for impersonating an NFL team.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Kind of odd that the NFL destroyed all the evidence..............

Ya, kinda weird, huh ?Hopefully this gets enough pressure on them to get Congress involved, we need to know the whole story, and I don't believe we are getting it right now.

Because with all of our other problems solved in this country, what we really need out elected officials spending time on is regulation and oversight of our entertainment.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Speaking for myself, as a Jets fan, I find this lawsuit ridiculous.

As a Dolphins fan, I agree.