sp6488 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 On 10/18/2017 at 10:54 PM, TXsteeler said: How much money is all of this stuff costing tax payers? On 10/18/2017 at 11:57 PM, jrry32 said: The NFL and NFLPA are private entities that pay for their own legal costs. The judges and court staff are salaried. In fact, the lawyers making money off of this leads to tax revenue (and consumption), so in the end, it's probably a net positive. You could ask this about any civil proceeding, I guess. A functioning court system is integral to the successful operation of a free market system. As @jrry32 alludes to, all of the entities involved pay taxes to cover the legal infrastructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devils1854 Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 12 minutes ago, sp6488 said: If I've learned anything during my time online, it's that everyone in online forums/comment sections is a lawyer. Im not a lawyer. Just a gynecologist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadpulse Posted October 23, 2017 Share Posted October 23, 2017 Judge denied the NFL's request to expedite the hearing. It wont be heard until 10/30, meaning Zeke survives to play another week of football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biletnikoff Posted October 24, 2017 Share Posted October 24, 2017 Is he suspended now, or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 On 10/21/2017 at 7:10 PM, sp6488 said: If I've learned anything during my time online, it's that everyone in online forums/comment sections is a lawyer. Unfortunately, a lot of people think they're basically lawyers. The Facebook and Twitter Lawyers are the worst. Seeing people shoot from the hip about complex legal issues they don't remotely understand because they have "common sense" is the absolute worst. And it's even more frustrating when you try explaining it to them only for them to tell you that they don't need your explanation and case law because they have "common sense." Common sense isn't nearly as common as stupid people think. 41 minutes ago, biletnikoff said: Is he suspended now, or not? Nope. He's good to go for another week. The hearing is on October 30th. We'll get an order after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raiderrocker18 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Hearing for injunction has been going on since 2 eastern. Judge says she needs to make a ruling by today. Once again, follow Pete brush on Twitter for live-in-court updates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phire Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 See ya Zeke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 That sound? The collective resigned sighs of every Zeke fantasy owner: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadpulse Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 glad I traded him! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phire Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 On 10/12/2017 at 5:41 PM, Phire said: On 10/12/2017 at 5:19 PM, raiderrocker18 said: Why? The main basis of injunctions is to avoid irreparable harm. If zeke sits games, he's never getting those back and the league can't make it up to him. As opposed to something like a money judgment, the impact from missing an nfl game can't just be undone. The irreparable harm is no different in a Texas court than a new york court. The Texas one was only dropped because the suit was filed prematurely, not because the argument for the injunction was defective. It's not to say he's likely to end up winning the case and never serving his suspension. But the grounds for an injunction are still sound imo I'm a lawyer. I recently was involved in litigation involving a temporary injunction sought against a public utility provider. The "main basis of injunctions is to avoid irreparable harm" is incorrect. Demonstrating that the claimant will suffer irreparable harm is one of four requirements for a temporary injunction to be granted, all equally weighted. The requirements are: 1) show irreparable harm without the injunction; 2) show no adequate remedy at law; 3) the claimant has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits; and 4) that the public benefits from the temporary injunction (very low bar). The fact that the district court in Texas granted the temporary injunction in the first place was pretty questionable. Why? Because I personally don't see how Zeke has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits. And, based on your comment that "it's not to say he's likely to end up winning the case" I don't think you do either. Hell, does anyone here think Zeke has a substantial likelihood of actually avoiding serving his suspension? I would submit that Zeke being a celebrity sports star in Texas is the only reason why he got the temporary injunction in the first place. I don't think a court in New York does him the same solid. Tried telling you guys @jrry32 @raiderrocker18 Haven't read the opinion yet but looking forward to it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footbull3196 Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Hopefully this is the last of this and he can just start serving the damn suspension. It's ridiculous how much this has been dragged out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Just now, Phire said: Tried telling you guys @jrry32 @raiderrocker18 Haven't read the opinion yet but looking forward to it There really isn't a "told you so" here. Every borderline case like this one will depend on the judge. It's pretty clear that two of the judges that heard the case thought one way. It just so happens that the one who got to make the last decision thought the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phire Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Just now, jrry32 said: There really isn't a "told you so" here. Every borderline case like this one will depend on the judge. It's pretty clear that two of the judges that heard the case thought one way. It just so happens that the one who got to make the last decision thought the other. One Texas judge did. The prior NY judge only did so to not step on Judge Failla's shoes. Wasn't a decision on the merits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gopherwrestler Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 did you guys hear about Zeke? what happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Just now, jrry32 said: There really isn't a "told you so" here. Every borderline case like this one will depend on the judge. It's pretty clear that two of the judges that heard the case thought one way. It just so happens that the one who got to make the last decision thought the other. Which is essentially what happened to Brady. 2 judges sided with him, two judges sided the league. Unfortunately the way it was split was that you had 1 judge acting independently in the initial hearing and then the other judge being overuled on a best out of 3 appeal. Luck of the draw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.