PDA

View Full Version : NFL Concussion lawsuits


Vis
05-04-2012, 07:14 AM
If they're going to be discussed and disparaged they should, at least, be read.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/91113420/Toby-Myles-v-NFL

There are strong allegation in the complaint. There is a cause of action for fraud. To sustain a claim of fraud, they are required to plead and prove each of the nine elements of fraud: (1) a representation; (2) falsity of the representation; (3) materiality of the representation; (4) speaker’s knowledge of the falsity of the representation; (5) the speaker’s intent it should be relied upon; (6) the hearer’s ignorance of the falsity of the representation; (7) the hearer’s reliance on the representation; (8) the hearer’s right to rely on the representation; and (9) the hearer’s consequent and proximate injury caused by reliance on the representation.

It's not as easy burden but what if they meet it?

Atlanta Dan
05-04-2012, 07:48 AM
Not claiming to have any specific knowledge of the litigation strategy for either side, but it seems as if there are a lot of similarities between these lawsuits and the tort claims brought by smokers against the tobacco companies for concealing the risks associated with smoking. Those cases were tough to prove and, unlike the NFL players, smokers did not have a collective bargaining agreement with Big Tobacco that set the terms and condition of their employment.with defendant

There are of course two sides to this story. For the NFL's position on these lawsuits, atttached is a link to the motion by the NFL to dismiss the lawsuit filed by former Atlanta Falcon Ray Easterling. Mr. Easterling took his life several weeks ago.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/77899568/NFL-Motion-to-Dismiss-Copy

Vis
05-04-2012, 08:14 AM
Not claiming to have any specific knowledge of the litigation strategy for either side, but it seems as if there are a lot of similarities between these lawsuits and the tort claims brought by smokers against the tobacco companies for concealing the risks associated with smoking. Those cases were tough to prove and, unlike the NFL players, smokers did not have a collective bargaining agreement with Big Tobacco that set the terms and condition of their employment.with defendant

There are of course two sides to this story. For the NFL's position on these lawsuits, atttached is a link to the motion by the NFL to dismiss the lawsuit filed by former Atlanta Falcon Ray Easterling. Mr. Easterling took his life several weeks ago.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/77899568/NFL-Motion-to-Dismiss-Copy

The CBA argument isn't a factual defense. If the Motion is correct on the 12(b)(6) grounds of simply failing to allege required elements in an Amended Complaint, that's the attorney's failure and doesn't speak to the merits. I' d be more interested in a SJ motion with attachments if you see one.

Atlanta Dan
05-04-2012, 09:51 AM
The CBA argument isn't a factual defense. If the Motion is correct on the 12(b)(6) grounds of simply failing to allege required elements in an Amended Complaint, that's the attorney's failure and doesn't speak to the merits. I' d be more interested in a SJ motion with attachments if you see one.

The CBA argument is a standard pre-emption argument (NFL previously has relied upon the CBA to bar a challenge to the draft and needing to stay in college three years before being allowed to play pro ball) and other dismissal argument is failure to plead fraud with specificity

If you do not have facts you are not simply allowed to throw allegtaions againt the wall in a complaint and then plan to prove it up in discovery - the attorney's failure is filing a case without supporting facts - I doubt the attorney left anything out since the complaint to which you linked threw in the kitchen sink (e.g. - citing ESPN Magazine articles as averments of fact)

SJ motions will not be filed until the obligatory motions to dismiss are considered by the Courts in these cases - you then will get discovery and summary judgment motions will not be filed until at least 2013 if the cases do not settle.

Vis
05-04-2012, 10:16 AM
The CBA argument is a standard pre-emption argument (NFL previously has relied upon the CBA to bar a challenge to the draft and needing to stay in college three years before being allowed to play pro ball) and other dismissal argument is failure to plead fraud with specificity

If you do not have facts you are not simply allowed to throw allegtaions againt the wall in a complaint and then plan to prove it up in discovery - the attorney's failure is filing a case without supporting facts - I doubt the attorney left anything out since the complaint to which you linked threw in the kitchen sink (e.g. - citing ESPN Magazine articles as averments of fact)

SJ motions will not be filed until the obligatory motions to dismiss are considered by the Courts in these cases - you then will get discovery and summary judgment motions will not be filed until at least 2013 if the cases do not settle.

Using the CBA to defend the draft and using it to prevent the coming to light of fraudulent behavior is different. Using the ESPN investigation is fine to make allegations of fact. Having all the evidence is not required before filing. i would refer you to the discovery rules. They have a purpose for existing.

Do you actually believe the NFL didn't push bad research to deny the connections? Do you just not care? The studies themselves were nothing more than loose stool water. They were ass gravy of the worse kind are are not defended as accurate anywhere.

Insurance defense lawyer?

Atlanta Dan
05-04-2012, 04:01 PM
Using the CBA to defend the draft and using it to prevent the coming to light of fraudulent behavior is different.

Using a CBA is the Swiss Army knife of defenses involving employee lawsuits - that is one reason the fraudulent concealment argument is a crucial issue to get around the CBA pre-emption

Insurance defense lawyer?

No:chuckle:


Do you just not care?

I think the league and the players both know and have known what they were getting into for decades - pro football is a dangerous game and any former player who contends they just figured that out is lying. Players being brain damaged is a tragedy, just as it is when a smoker dies of lung cancer (I have lost several family members to that vile disease). But I personally have problems with people filing suit against the tobacco companies for damages - you buy the ticket, you take the ride

As far as me being the poster who may not care, this was an interesting interview with Malcolm Gladwell on the issue of where fans fit into the issue of continuing to watch a game that is known to seriously injure a significant percentage of its participants

Should the NFL be banned too?

Gladwell: As long as the risks are explicit, the players warned, and those injured properly compensated, then I'm not sure we can stop people from playing. A better question is whether it is ethical to WATCH football. That's a harder question.

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/intelligence_squared/2012/04/the_next_slate_intelligence_squared_debate_is_may_ 8_why_malcolm_gladwell_thinks_we_should_ban_colleg e_football_.html

Following up on that observation have been a series of posts in The Atlantic

We need to be honest here: If you're going to play pro football, being hurt isn't merely a problem because you want to play. It's a problem because your absence could decrease your team's chance of winning, hurt your own image of self, and (perhaps most importantly) put you on the waiver-wire. Football is a job. I have no idea how, specifically, the NFL can change that. It's strikes me as built into the structure of the game.

I'll have more (in longer form) on my decision to turn away, a feeling that's only deepened as I've thought more on this. But I want to double down on something. I can't really over-emphasize how much this is a personal decision, and not—as one commenter put it—a "personal boycott."

I have no real designs to keep grown men from playing football. I don't really have designs on anything. I think as progressives we sometimes get trapped into discussing morality strictly in the paradigm of "affecting change." But I think morality in the Emersonian paradigm—that "nothing is at last sacred, but the integrity of your own mind," that religion is what you do when no one's looking... In football, as in so many other things, each of has to decide where that demonstration to self must be made. Personal morality is rarely improved in a crowd.

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/05/junior-seau-is-dead-cont/256722/

My guess is your concerrns about the conduct by the NFL and whether others care about it has not reached the point where you are willing to forego watching the games?:noidea:

No intent to throw rocks at your well reasoned posts, just suggesting that there is a certain tension between contending the NFL has been callous about player safety while continuing to patronize its product that we all know has to a significant extent become so popular due to the mayhem that occurs between the lines.

:drink:

Vis
05-04-2012, 04:47 PM
They haven't known. People on this site deny the severity of the problem even now. The suits allege that the NFL knew the dangers and hid them from the players. If true, what is that worth to those whose lives are destroyed? The league still won't mandate the best helmets, not that they prevent the majority of concussions. But they do prevent some. Education and acceptance will help too if appropriate care is taken in not returning players to the field too soon. The damage is cumulative.

I am right that you are a lawyer too. Do you handle injury cases. I've had too many brain injury cases. I have one 10 years old going to trial in June. Sure, sometimes they're worth a lot but I'd rather a good knee replacement case any day. Brain injury cases are as emotionally draining as custody battles between 2 people who should have never passed on their genes.

Atlanta Dan
05-04-2012, 05:17 PM
They haven't known..

No question brain injuries are traumatic - but there is a difference between someone being injured by a drunk driver as opposed to jumping into the shallow end of the pool

Roger Staubach retired due to concussions after the 1979 season and Lynn Swann retired due to concussions after the 1982 season

Sports Illustrated ran an article on brain dysfunction tied to concussions in 1994

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1006087/1/index.htm

The adverse consequences of concussions arising from playing football appears to have been out there since at least the late 1970s

Exactly how much do you contend needs to be "known" before it is presumed a player played football with the knowledge he might sustain a concussion that causes long term physical harm but elected to assume that risk?

Or are you contending the NFL is strictly liable and that the players assume no responsibility for the consequences of electing to play football?

Vis
05-04-2012, 05:20 PM
Roger Staubach retired due to concussions after the 1979 season and Lynn Swann retired due to concussions after the 1982 season

Sports Illustrated ran an article on brain dysfunction tied to concussions in 1994

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1006087/1/index.htm

The adverse consequences of concussions arising from playing football appears to have been out there since at least the late 1970s

Exactly how much do you contend needs to be "known" before it is presumed a player played football with the knowledge he might sustain a concussion that causes long term physical harm but elected to assume that risk?

Or are you contending the NFL is strictly liable and that the players assume no responsibility for the consequences of electing to play football?


Webster's brain was the first one tested and the league denied any connection. That was yesterday. Today they admit it.

I'm not worried about liability. Let's call it worker's comp and OSHA compliant.

Atlanta Dan
05-04-2012, 06:11 PM
Let's call it worker's comp and OSHA compliant.

How and where to seek workers comp for NFL related injuries is another front in this war:chuckle:

The National Football League and the Atlanta Falcons are suing nine former Falcons players to force them to litigate workers' compensation cases in Georgia rather than in California, where dozens of current and former NFL players have sought compensation for injuries sustained from playing football....

The suit appears to be part of a broader fight between the league and the players over how and whether current and former players should be compensated for injuries incurred on the playing field. ..

According to a 2010 New York Times investigation, California is the only state where professional athletes who have played as little as a single game in the state may file workers' compensation claims for long-term injuries they may have sustained years earlier.

According the Times report, California law also bars employees from signing away certain workers' rights and their unions from bargaining them away. Those policies have prompted the players association to argue that player contracts requiring them to file workers' compensation claims in their teams' home states may be unenforceable....

But NFL attorneys have fought back, taking the players' claims to arbitration and then seeking federal judgments to enforce the owners' contentions that players' contracts require them to seek compensation in the states where the professional teams for which they played make their homes....

http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202546314009&thepage=1

NFL will fight hard to keep these claims from turning into tort claims

tony hipchest
05-04-2012, 08:22 PM
the dialogue in this thread is 1 of many things that makes this forum so great. i think its a perfect microcosm of the discussions the nfl/players' big boys are having on both sides of the table right now.

i agree that thsi is very much like the tobacco lawsuits. i also agree that the big coproration was most likely sweeping the inevitable truth under the rug for as long as they could (wheter it be intentional or out of denial).

if the players didnt know taking too many knocks on the noggin was detrimental to their health, they probably werent the sharpest tools in the shed to begin with. then again, nobody ever accused dexter manley of being a rocket scientist. im sure the league capitalized on this mentality of ignorance that prevailed. when it comes to billion dolla industries, those with the least "brains" will always be the last to know.

its gonna be very interesting to see how this all plays out, and even once there is (if there is) a resolution, who is to say it is the right one? the workmans comp/OSHA angle definitely seems to be the wildcard in the players hand, cause i think the nfl and big $$$ comes out on top with theirs.

TRH
05-04-2012, 09:42 PM
one thing i think everyone can agree on......the ambulence-chasing attorneys are rushing to get their seat on this train before they're all taken. They see piles and piles of money at the end of this rainbow.

SteelersinCA
05-07-2012, 06:44 PM
I don't think there are piles and piles of money at the end of this rainbow. The NFL is, simply, too big to lose a lawsuit like this. It will never make it to trial. Some agreement will get worked out where the retired players get care or something.

Imagine the effect of the lawsuit. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the NFL doesn't have scientists in their employ, do they? When we say they are burying the evidence, what exactly do you mean? It is certainly one thing to deny Webster's injuries and then turn around and admit to them, but that is a far cry from actively trying to bury evidence. Do we have some allegation of a cover up?

I always bristle at the contention that people flip flop and that's somehow a bad thing. I want people to flip flop, I want people to continue to research and learn new things. I want a person who isn't afraid to back down from their position upon learning something novel. If the NFL didn't see the connection with Webster and then learned something new and reversed position, I don't see the problem with that.

I'll stay out of the civil fray, that's entirely too much paperwork for me, when it gets criminal, which I suppose wouldn't be too far fetched if they are actively burying evidence, I'll have more interest.

4xSBChamps
05-12-2012, 08:53 AM
The NFL is, simply, too big to lose a lawsuit like this.

I don't know if the League is 'too-BIG to lose' (see : war on cigarettes), but it is certainly more popular than the tobacco industry

TRH
05-12-2012, 11:41 AM
The NFL is, simply, too big to lose a lawsuit like this.

.


I would highly disagree with that.
With 'unqualified' juries and activist judges handing out ridiculous wins and stratosphere-type settlements like they're candy, nothing's too big. They said the same thing about other losing industries. Plus, there are many groups with a bullseye on the NFL who are pushing their own agenda's with the media's help. Add to that the dozens, if not hundreds of attorney's all trying to join in for their "lottery ticket" win. Not a good situation.

Vis
05-12-2012, 06:34 PM
I would highly disagree with that.
With 'unqualified' juries and activist judges handing out ridiculous wins and stratosphere-type settlements like they're candy, nothing's too big. They said the same thing about other losing industries. Plus, there are many groups with a bullseye on the NFL who are pushing their own agenda's with the media's help. Add to that the dozens, if not hundreds of attorney's all trying to join in for their "lottery ticket" win. Not a good situation.

Why do you spew such BS?

TRH
05-13-2012, 08:36 AM
Why do you spew such BS?

because its the absolute truth and we all know it. We may disagree on whether the suits are right or wrong or whatever, but there's no denying what i said.

Bayz101
05-13-2012, 08:52 AM
Why do you spew such BS?

Why do you feel the need to be offensive? Keep it civil, please. It's one thing if you don't agree with someone, it's another to call it bullshit.

Vis
05-13-2012, 10:14 AM
Why do you feel the need to be offensive? Keep it civil, please. It's one thing if you don't agree with someone, it's another to call it bullshit.

Bullshit mean its factually wrong and based on bias and/or ignorance. It applies to his posts. He has no understanding of tort law or the court system. If I say a Ford is a Chevy that's not a difference of opinion. It's just wrong.

Hawaii 5-0
05-13-2012, 09:52 PM
Absence of NFLPA looms over concussion lawsuits

Posted by Mike Florio on May 13, 2012

http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/davepear-card-front.jpg?w=155

Former NFL lineman Dave Pear, an advocate for former players and one of the many who are suing the league, wants former players to sign a “declaration of independence” from the NFL Players Association, according to the Denver Post.

There’s a better way for former players who are suing the NFL to separate from the NFLPA. They can sue the union, too.

To date, none of the hundreds of players who have sued the NFL have joined the NFLPA as a defendant, even though the NFLPA had a central role in the creation and efforts of the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Committee in 1994. Indeed, NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith confessed to Congress in early 2010 that the union shares blame with the league for the sluggish acknowledgement and reaction to the long-term perils of head injuries.

“There is simply no justification for the NFL to have previously ignored or discredited Dr. [Bennet] Omalu and others with relevant, valid research,” Smith said at the time. “For far too long, our former players were left adrift; as I emphasized at the last hearing, we were complicit in the lack of leadership and accountability but that ends now. I am here again to make it clear that our commitment is unwavering.”

The commitment may be unwavering, but Smith’s confession is also potentially damning. Still, the NFLPA has not landed in the former players’ cross hairs.

The strategic decision to give the Players Association a pass likely arises from several factors. First, the NFL has the deep pockets that the lawyers hope to raid; in comparison, the NFLPA has peanuts. Second, suing the NFLPA would motivate the union to join with the NFL and show that nothing was hidden because no one really understood the consequences of concussions until recently, at which time the parties mobilized to make changes to the game. Third, if the NFLPA were sued, the union would have every reason to broaden the divide between current and former players, recruiting current players to testify about things some of the plaintiffs may have said regarding whether they would have played football even if they had known the risks, whether they don’t really fault the NFL for what happened, whether they’re not actually injured, and/or whether they’re simply in it for the money.

Fourth, and perhaps more importantly, a direct assault against the NFLPA would highlight that the players themselves failed to do enough to protect their own interests, since the union is the players and the players are the union and the union was working directly with the NFL from 1994 on as both parties tried to understand the impact of concussions.

As to the latter point, not suing the NFLPA won’t avoid the problem. The NFL undoubtedly will point to what lawyers call the “empty chair,” claiming that an absent party the plaintiffs chose not to sue is as culpable if not more culpable than the NFL itself.

Moreover, the fact that the plaintiffs were represented by the NFLPA creates a threshold hurdle for the entire litigation, given that the NFL has argued that the former players were subject to a Collective Bargaining Agreement that contained a grievance procedure for claims like the ones currently being made.

So while some former players may now hope to split with the NFLPA, their past connection to the union will be impossible to erase — and that could make it much harder for the former players who are suing the NFL to prevail.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/13/absence-of-nflpa-looms-over-concussion-lawsuits/

Vis
05-14-2012, 06:44 AM
If you make a business decision to hide a known risk, you take your chances. if you lie about the risk, even more so.

If the NFL and the NFLPA knowingly put forward a false report on brain injuries in order to maximize profits, what defense would you offer?

Hawaii 5-0
05-19-2012, 11:44 PM
Three more concussion lawsuits filed this week

Posted by Mike Florio on May 19, 2012

The numbers keep growing and growing, as more and more former players are adding their names to concussion lawsuits against the NFL.

According to NFLConcussionLitigation.com, three more actions were filed this week.

One action, filed in Georgia, has only four plaintiffs: Robert Edwards, Kenneth Callicutt, Byron Ingram, and Todd Kelly. Edwards (who tore up his knee playing beach football in conjunction with the 1998 Pro Bowl, played only one full season in the NFL, with the Patriots. He returned to the NFL in 2002, rushing 20 times in 12 games with the Dolphins.

Ten more players filed Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, a day after Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma sued Commissioner Roger Goodell in that same court.

Also on Friday, a dozen players filed suit in Los Angeles, including another former Patriots running back, Sam “Bam” Cunningham, along with former Redskins receiver Alvin Garrett.

The total number of lawsuits has now reached 79, with more than 2,200 former players suing the league.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/19/three-more-concussion-lawsuits-filed-this-week/

Atlanta Dan
05-20-2012, 07:36 AM
Three more concussion lawsuits filed this week...

One action, filed in Georgia, has only four plaintiffs: Robert Edwards, Kenneth Callicutt, Byron Ingram, and Todd Kelly. Edwards (who tore up his knee playing beach football in conjunction with the 1998 Pro Bowl, played only one full season in the NFL, with the Patriots. He returned to the NFL in 2002, rushing 20 times in 12 games.

To the extent anyone is wondering whether these concussion lawsuits include some attorneys who are just filing away to see what sticks, consider Robert Edwards claiming he is a victim after playing one season in the NFL.

Total bull****

Hawaii 5-0
05-22-2012, 01:07 AM
Eric Dickerson joins concussion lawsuit against the NFL

Posted by Michael David Smith on May 21, 2012

http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/ericdickerson1.jpg?w=141

Hall of Fame running back Eric Dickerson is the latest former superstar to sue the NFL over concussions.

Dickerson is part of a group of 15 retired players who filed a new suit against the NFL, claiming the league failed to adequately address concussions and their long-term consequences, NFLConcussionLitigation.com reports.

Others involved in this lawsuit include former AFL All-Star running back Hoyle Granger, who played in the 1960s and 1970s for the Houston Oilers and New Orleans Saints, and the estates of deceased former players David Lunceford and Ernie Stautner, both of whom were suffering from Alzheimer’s disease when they died.

Dickerson is one of the biggest names to join the concussion lawsuits to date. He led the league in rushing four times, was a six-time Pro Bowler and gained more than 13,000 total yards for the Rams, Colts, Raiders and Falcons. In retirement he’s had a number of TV jobs, including working as a sideline reporter on Monday Night Football.

More than 2,200 former players have joined a total of 80 concussion-related suits against the league.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/21/eric-dickerson-joins-concussion-lawsuit-against-the-nfl/

Vis
05-22-2012, 07:56 AM
To the extent anyone is wondering whether these concussion lawsuits include some attorneys who are just filing away to see what sticks, consider Robert Edwards claiming he is a victim after playing one season in the NFL.

Total bull****


What's his medical diagnosis? What is the cause? If you don't know, why attack? Ignorant assumptions aren't lawyerly. If you have the facts of the case and feel that Edwards' claim lacks merit, spell it out for the class using those facts.

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 11:01 AM
What's his medical diagnosis? What is the cause? If you don't know, why attack? Ignorant assumptions aren't lawyerly. If you have the facts of the case and feel that Edwards' claim lacks merit, spell it out for the class using those facts.

My point is that suddenly hundreds of NFL players simultaneously realize they have incurred physical damages due to concussions?

Since Edwards played a hell of a lot longer at UGA (and for that matter his high school) than he did in the NFL why not add those institutions as party-defendants?
Perish the thought this might be a money grab against a wealthy pro sports league if this solicitation is an example of how these cases are being developed

Are you a former NFL player? You may be entitled to compensation.

If you or a loved one played in the NFL and feel that your long term care is being ignored Please call Attorney Bill Kyros at 1-800-934-2921 to discuss your rights. We can schedule a meeting with you and your family. Kyros Law Offices along with our partners has significant experience representing sports players with injuries, long term disability litigation, and complex plaintiff's cases throughout the country and we have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of our clients.
Free Consultation
Complete the form on this page or call 1-800-934-2921 for a free consultation.
Your name
Your email
Phone number
Address
City, State, Zip
Are you a former NFL player with long term health concerns?

Please tell us about your case
By submitting this form, you accept our privacy policy.

http://nflheadinjurylawsuits.com/nfl-head-injury-lawsuit-news/17-number-of-nfl-player-concussion-lawsuits-against-the-nfl-increases.html

That sure reads like an attorney who is looking for a solid case before filing suit

And thanks for calling me ignorant - I note I am not the first poster you have elected to attack personally if they disagree with your perspective.

Stay classy.t:drink:

tony hipchest
05-22-2012, 01:46 PM
Are you a former NFL player? You may be entitled to compensation.

If you or a loved one played in the NFL and feel that your long term care is being ignored Please call Attorney Bill Kyros at 1-800-934-2921 to discuss your rights. We can schedule a meeting with you and your family. Kyros Law Offices along with our partners has significant experience representing sports players with injuries, long term disability litigation, and complex plaintiff's cases throughout the country and we have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of our clients.
Free Consultation
Complete the form on this page or call 1-800-934-2921 for a free consultation.
Your name
Your email
Phone number
Address
City, State, Zip
Are you a former NFL player with long term health concerns?

Please tell us about your case
By submitting this form, you accept our privacy policy.

http://nflheadinjurylawsuits.com/nfl-head-injury-lawsuit-news/17-number-of-nfl-player-concussion-lawsuits-against-the-nfl-increases.html

:

really? :doh:

i thought you were making up a parody spoof at first.

holy mesothelioma batman!

TRH
05-22-2012, 02:30 PM
My point is that suddenly hundreds of NFL players simultaneously realize they have incurred physical damages due to concussions?

Since Edwards played a hell of a lot longer at UGA (and for that matter his high school) than he did in the NFL why not add those institutions as party-defendants?
Perish the thought this might be a money grab against a wealthy pro sports league if this solicitation is an example of how these cases are being developed

Are you a former NFL player? You may be entitled to compensation.

If you or a loved one played in the NFL and feel that your long term care is being ignored Please call Attorney Bill Kyros at 1-800-934-2921 to discuss your rights. We can schedule a meeting with you and your family. Kyros Law Offices along with our partners has significant experience representing sports players with injuries, long term disability litigation, and complex plaintiff's cases throughout the country and we have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of our clients.
Free Consultation
Complete the form on this page or call 1-800-934-2921 for a free consultation.
Your name
Your email
Phone number
Address
City, State, Zip
Are you a former NFL player with long term health concerns?

Please tell us about your case
By submitting this form, you accept our privacy policy.

http://nflheadinjurylawsuits.com/nfl-head-injury-lawsuit-news/17-number-of-nfl-player-concussion-lawsuits-against-the-nfl-increases.html

That sure reads like an attorney who is looking for a solid case before filing suit

And thanks for calling me ignorant - I note I am not the first poster you have elected to attack personally if they disagree with your perspective.

Stay classy.t:drink:


This stuff is what i've been saying before and i get blasted by idiots with their heads stuck in the sand (WAY down in the sand).
Its despicable. Before too long there's going to be so many attorney's looking to leech on to ex-football players it's going to look like those "attorney's for drunk driving accidents" TV commercials.

Hell, why dont' every single ex-player who's ever played the game get an attorney and together fight for that additional "lottery ticket" of money. I just think this thing is going WAYYYYYYYYYY too far.

Vis
05-22-2012, 02:39 PM
My point is that suddenly hundreds of NFL players simultaneously realize they have incurred physical damages due to concussions?

Since Edwards played a hell of a lot longer at UGA (and for that matter his high school) than he did in the NFL why not add those institutions as party-defendants?
Perish the thought this might be a money grab against a wealthy pro sports league if this solicitation is an example of how these cases are being developed

Are you a former NFL player? You may be entitled to compensation.

If you or a loved one played in the NFL and feel that your long term care is being ignored Please call Attorney Bill Kyros at 1-800-934-2921 to discuss your rights. We can schedule a meeting with you and your family. Kyros Law Offices along with our partners has significant experience representing sports players with injuries, long term disability litigation, and complex plaintiff's cases throughout the country and we have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of our clients.
Free Consultation
Complete the form on this page or call 1-800-934-2921 for a free consultation.
Your name
Your email
Phone number
Address
City, State, Zip
Are you a former NFL player with long term health concerns?

Please tell us about your case
By submitting this form, you accept our privacy policy.

http://nflheadinjurylawsuits.com/nfl-head-injury-lawsuit-news/17-number-of-nfl-player-concussion-lawsuits-against-the-nfl-increases.html

That sure reads like an attorney who is looking for a solid case before filing suit

And thanks for calling me ignorant - I note I am not the first poster you have elected to attack personally if they disagree with your perspective.

Stay classy.t:drink:

Maybe they just learned that the league hid actual knowledge of the danger as is alleged. The issue is intentional misrepresentions. What's is hard about this? Sure, maybe it isn't true but don't pretend these cases are some sort of strict liability claim. We get enough of that bs from laymen. If you are a lawyer, you should understand that no on outside ever knows what the litigants know. To judge the case in either direction is garbage without those facts. And that you are ignorant of those facts is itself a fact, not being a part of either litigation team. (Note: If you are a part of the litigation then you aren't ignorant on the facts but need to turn in your license)

Vis
05-22-2012, 02:39 PM
This stuff is what i've been saying before and i get blasted by idiots with their heads stuck in the sand (WAY down in the sand).
Its despicable. Before too long there's going to be so many attorney's looking to leech on to ex-football players it's going to look like those "attorney's for drunk driving accidents" TV commercials.

Hell, why dont' every single ex-player who's ever played the game get an attorney and together fight for that additional "lottery ticket" of money. I just think this thing is going WAYYYYYYYYYY too far.


like this.......

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 02:59 PM
Maybe they just learned that the league hid actual knowledge of the danger as is alleged. The issue is intentional misrepresentions. What's is hard about this? Sure, maybe it isn't true but don't pretend these cases are some sort of strict liability claim. We get enough of that bs from laymen. If you are a lawyer, you should understand that no on outside ever knows what the litigants know. To judge the case in either direction is garbage without those facts. And that you are ignorant of those facts is itself a fact, not being a part of either litigation team. (Note: If you are a part of the litigation then you aren't ignorant on the facts but need to turn in your license)

Not that i care to go through your prior posts to quote them to you but spare me the sanctimony about pre-judging the cases - your posts pretty clearly indicate what side you come down on, going back to the posts after Junior Seau killed himself

I admit to not regarding lawyers who troll for clients on the internet with 1-800 numbers and "free consultations" to protect "rights" as being on an altrustic search for truth and justice. Just because it pays the bills and is not a crime doesn't make it admirable.

Vis
05-22-2012, 03:02 PM
Not that i care to go through your prior posts to quote them to you but spare me the sanctimony about pre-judging the cases - your posts pretty clearly indicate what side you come down on this, going back to the posts after Junior Seau killed himself

I admit to not regarding lawyers who troll for clients on the internet with 1-800 numbers and "free consultations" to protect "rights" as being on an altrustic search for truth and justice. Just because it pays the bills and is not a crime doesn't make it admirable.


Go back to any post you want and it will be about getting full disclosure and my frustration with the lack of general knowledge about what TBIs are. Copy and paste anything. But don't spew tort reform type soundbites,. You should know better. What type of law do you practice and how long have you been in practice?

Vis
05-22-2012, 03:19 PM
Old 05-02-2012, 03:44 PM #12
Vis
Team Captain

Vis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SC
Posts: 706
Gender: Male
Member Number: 5117

Default Re: Junior Seau dead?
Twitter posts questioning Junior's concussion history. I don't remember him as someone out for a concussion ever. Does anyone else?
__________________


Is this the offending post? Which side of his actual medical condition did I come down on here?

Vis
05-22-2012, 03:22 PM
Default Re: Junior Seau dead?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan View Post
Agree with TRH that while it could be CTE it could also be that Seau had a history of severe depression unrelated to CTE or for all we know might have financial problems or a severe drug habit (2 other not uncommon occurences among retired professional athletes) - if anyone tossed out that Seau's suicide could be due to drugs, money problems or untreated depression with no facts to back it up they justifiably would be blasted.

For the doctor i quoted to throw out speculation as to causation while admitting he did not have a clue about Seau's personal condition was extraordinarily
unprofessional unless the goal was to contend everytime a pro foootball player takes his own life it must be presumned to be CTE relatied unless proven definitively to the contrary.

NFL induced CTE is a major problem but the talking heads attributing a suicide to CTE with no proof to support it is not a proper means of advancing the goal of having CTE among pro football players being taken more seriously

ME:
No one has said that's what it was. But to say that's the first thing that needs to be ruled out is being responsible. To say it's untreated depression gets you nowhere. The cause of the depression is what matters. Especially if the cause is preventable.

This one? Looks to me, Dan, that you were taking a position without actual evidence either way and I was saying, "Let's get the evidence"

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 03:31 PM
This one?

Nope - this one posted at 05/04/2012 at 10:16

Using the CBA to defend the draft and using it to prevent the coming to light of fraudulent behavior is different. Using the ESPN investigation is fine to make allegations of fact. Having all the evidence is not required before filing. i would refer you to the discovery rules. They have a purpose for existing.

Do you actually believe the NFL didn't push bad research to deny the connections? Do you just not care? The studies themselves were nothing more than loose stool water. They were ass gravy of the worse kind are are not defended as accurate anywhere.

Insurance defense lawyer?

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=89005

In that gem you accuse the NFL of pushing bad research, conclude the NFL CBA pre-emption argument is without merit and wind up the post by asking if i am an insurance defense lawyer.

Please walk me through what part of that quote involves "getting full disclosure and my frustration with the lack of general knowledge about what TBIs are" as opposed to plaintiff's attorney sound bites

Vis
05-22-2012, 03:39 PM
Nope - this one posted at 05/04/2012 at 10:16

Using the CBA to defend the draft and using it to prevent the coming to light of fraudulent behavior is different. Using the ESPN investigation is fine to make allegations of fact. Having all the evidence is not required before filing. i would refer you to the discovery rules. They have a purpose for existing.

Do you actually believe the NFL didn't push bad research to deny the connections? Do you just not care? The studies themselves were nothing more than loose stool water. They were ass gravy of the worse kind are are not defended as accurate anywhere.

Insurance defense lawyer?

http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=89005

In that gem you accuse the NFL of pushing bad research, conclude the NFL CBA pre-emption argument is without merit and wind up the post by asking if i am an insurance defense lawyer.

Please walk me through what part of that quote involves "getting full disclosure and my frustration with the lack of general knowledge about what TBIs are" as opposed to plaintiff's attorney sound bites


I do accuse them of pushing bad research. They have admitted it was wrong. All legitimate science disagrees with it. No one is defending those findings not even the man who ran the committee. I didn't have to come down on 1 of 2 sides here, there's only 1 side. I did throw in colorful language to lighten the mood.

Vis
05-22-2012, 04:04 PM
(CNN) – A new study links U.S. veterans exposed to improvised explosive devices to the same dementia-like brain disease found NFL players.

The research suggests there is a common thread that binds those exposed to traumatic brain injury, whether it happens on the football field or war zone.

Researchers from Boston University compared the brain tissue of four veterans to that of pro athletes with a history of concussion.

They also exposed a group of mice to blast winds, and found they also showed evidence of the brain disease.

http://www.kctv5.com/story/18469361/brain-study-links-veterans-nfl-players

Vis
05-22-2012, 04:21 PM
Doctor Yes
Elliot Pellman, the NFL's top medical adviser, claims it's okay for players with concussions to get back in the game. Time for a second opinion
by Peter Keating

"There's going to be some controversy about you going back to play." Elliot Pellman looks Wayne Chrebet in the eye in the fourth quarter of a tight game, Jets vs. Giants on Nov. 2, 2003, at the Meadowlands. A knee to the back of the head knocked Chrebet stone-cold unconscious a quarter earlier, and now the Jets' team doctor is putting the wideout through a series of mental tests. Pellman knows Chrebet has suffered a concussion, but the player is performing adequately on standard memory exercises. "This is very important for you," the portly physician tells the local hero, as was later reported in the New York Daily News. "This is very important for your career." Then he asks, "Are you okay?" When Chrebet replies, "I'm fine," Pellman sends him back in.

YOU GET KNOCKED DIZZY, maybe you black out, you slowly come to your senses. You feel strangely removed from your surroundings, maybe you have a seizure, maybe you puke. But you put your helmet back on as soon as you can walk straight. Any behavior, no matter how bizarre, becomes routine if someone repeats it often enough. And for decades, professional football players have adapted to concussions, shaking them off, calling them "dings," laughing about how they can't remember the number of blows to the head they have taken.

Only in recent years have scientists started to understand exactly what happens inside a brain when a head gets smashed and to explore why some players get hurt worse or cope better than others. The NFL is among those looking for answers, with good reason: According to league data, about 100 players a year suffer concussions from hits that average 98 times the force of gravity.

Pro football's powers-that-be began to study the subject formally in 1994. Following a rash of
head injuries to stars such as Troy Aikman and Steve Young, then-commissioner Paul Tagliabue established the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury (MTBI) Committee. He named Elliot Pellman, M.D., its chairman.

Since it first published research results in 2003, Pellman's committee has drawn a number of important conclusions about head trauma and how to treat it that contradict the research and experiences of many other doctors who treat sports concussions, not to mention the players who have suffered them. For example, Pellman and his colleagues wrote in January 2005 that returning to play after a concussion "does not involve significant risk of a second injury either in the same game or during the season." But a 2003 NCAA study of 2,905 college football players found just the opposite: Those who have suffered concussions are more susceptible to further head trauma for seven to 10 days after the injury.

Pellman and his group have also stated repeatedly that their work shows "no evidence of worsening injury or chronic cumulative effects of multiple MTBIs in NFL players." But a 2003 report by the Center for the Study of Retired Athletes at the University of North Carolina found a link between multiple concussions and depression among former pro players with histories of concussions. A 2005 follow-up study at the Center showed a connection between concussions and both brain impairment and Alzheimer's disease among retired NFL players.

Several former NFLers who took fierce hits to the head during their playing days have testified to the lasting effects of concussions. "I can't help but look at the concussions I sustained as a reason for the headaches, the depression, the blurred vision, the slurred speech that I might have at some times," Hall of Fame linebacker Harry Carson told Outside the Lines. Carson, who played for the Giants from 1976 to 1988, continued, "When I look back at the many hits I inflicted on people and at some of the hits I have gotten, it becomes clear to me that not only was I abusing my body, I was also abusing the gray matter in my skull."

Former fullback Merril Hoge, who played from 1987 to 1994, had his career ended by repeated concussions. "Six weeks after I was forced to retire, when I had started to feel better, I had an appearance at a wine-tasting event," says the ESPN analyst. "The moment the wine touched my lips, I went blind for the most terrifying 10 seconds of my life. My doctor later explained I had probably suffered trauma in the vision area of my brain. I think that speaks to the cumulative effects."

There are various reasons that the Pellman committee's findings might clash with these accounts and with other research. Recently active NFL players, whom the committee is studying, could differ from the subjects of other studies in some important way, such as their health or their protective equipment. Or one or more of the studies could be flawed. Concussions, after all, are a tricky subject, both because players don't like to report them and because they involve the complicated inner wirings of the brain. But Pellman is steadfast in his unwillingness to accept the work of others. "Pellman's committee has repeatedly questioned and disagreed with the findings of researchers who didn't come from their own injury group," says Julian Bailes, chairman of neurosurgery at West Virginia University. (Tagliabue declined to comment on Pellman or his research, and the NFL referred all questions for this story to Pellman.)

The NFL allows each team to manage concussions as it sees fit. When a player is injured, the team doctor, sometimes with input from trainers and specialists, decides when he can return to the field. In practice, according to Pellman's committee, 51.7% of players who suffer concussions—including a quarter of those who are knocked out—return in the same game. Pellman has written that "many NFL players can be safely allowed to return to play on the day of injury" and that "the current decisionmaking of NFL team physicians seems appropriate for return to the game after a concussion."

Not according to the consensus of experts outside the NFL, it doesn't. The Second International Conference on Concussion in Sport met in Prague in 2004 and released the following statement: "When a player shows ANY symptoms or signs of a concussion … the player should not be allowed to return to play in the current game or practice … When in doubt, sit them out!" That's what the first conference (in Vienna in 2001) found too. All standard U.S. guidelines, such as those first set by the American Academy of Neurology and the Colorado Medical Society, agree that athletes who lose consciousness should never return to play in the same game.

Sports doctors generally believe concussions make people more vulnerable to future damage, especially in the period closely following the injury. That's because head trauma sets off a storm of chemical changes in the brain that can affect reflexes even if outward symptoms have subsided. And plenty of players know what it's like to be vulnerable. "I took a blow to the head during a Monday-night game for the Bears against the Chiefs, and I had amnesia on the plane ride home five or six hours later," Hoge says. "That's when the team doctors decided my return-to-play date. Four days later I was practicing, and I realized I was struggling with learning new plays." Five weeks into the 1994 season, Hoge took another hit, walked off the field and into the locker room, and passed out. For about 15 seconds, he even stopped breathing. "I had to learn how to read again," he says. "You could take me around the block and I'd never get home." (Hoge sued John Munsell, then Chicago's team doctor, and won $1.55 million in 2000, a verdict that was later overturned.)

Several of the country's preeminent neurosurgeons and neuropsychologists have grown increasingly concerned that the league is putting players at risk by following Pellman's lead. They've had their doubts since the early days of his appointment to lead the committee. For one thing, Pellman is a rheumatologist by training—a specialist in the treatment of joints and muscles—not a neurologist. For another, when he started out, he often professed ignorance about the subject in question. "I would hear him say things in speeches like, 'I don't know much about concussions, I learn from my players,' and, 'We as a field don't know much about concussions,' and it used to bother me," says one doctor. "We knew what to do about concussions, but he was acting like it was new ground." Their dismay has only increased since The New York Times revealed last year that Pellman attended medical school in Guadalajara, Mexico, and does not hold a medical degree from SUNY Stony Brook, as he once claimed. "When neuropsychologists sit around telling jokes, we call him 'Mr. Pellman,' " says a colleague.

As a biology major at NYU, Pellman worked his way through college, holding jobs at his family's flower shop in the Bronx and as a cabdriver. Low grades led him to go to medical school at the Universidad Autonoma de Guadalajara in 1975. After a one-year residency at Stony Brook, Pellman received his medical degree from the New York State Department of Education. He was hired by the Jets in 1988 and has been medical director of the Islanders since 1996 and of Arena Football's Dragons since 2000. The NFL named him medical liaison to the commissioner in 2001, and two years later, MLB hired him as its medical adviser. The gregarious 52-year-old also runs ProHealth Care Associates, a private medical practice in Lake Success, N.Y.

Now there are questions not only about Pellman's résumé and conclusions but about his methods, too. It turns out that when he and his collaborators assembled data for a crucial part of their ongoing study, they didn't include results from hundreds of NFL players, some of whom had had concussions. Says Kevin Guskiewicz, director of the Sports Medicine Research Laboratory at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: "The data that hasn't shown up makes their work questionable industry-funded research."

WILLIAM BARR is a neuropsychologist, which means he studies the relationship between how the brain functions and how the mind works. He's also a lifelong Detroit sports fan who keeps a photo of Gordie Howe on his office wall. In 1992, Barr was running a lab at Long Island Jewish Hospital in New Hyde Park, N.Y., when his phone rang. It was Elliot Pellman.

"I don't know who any neuropsychologists are, I've never worked with one," Barr recalls Pellman saying. "But somebody said Al Toon should see a neuropsychologist, so I asked around and I'm calling you."

Barr had treated plenty of brain injuries. He thought it was pretty cool that his medical and sports interests might converge, so he agreed to see the Jets receiver, who had suffered a series of serious head injuries. After testing by Barr and encouragement by Pellman, Toon retired.

In 1995, Pellman called Barr again, this time to see Boomer Esiason after a skull-crunching hit by Bruce Smith. With that, Barr became the Jets' neuropsychology consultant. Over the next nine years, he saw a series of Jets with concussions and conducted baseline tests on 382 players.

Baselines are a series of mental tasks, such as remembering words or designs, that an athlete completes while he is in an uninjured state. A doctor can then compare a concussed player's performance on the tests to his initial results. "After" scores make sense only in the context of "before" scores.

As Barr collected his data, Pellman told him there was one rule: "Don't talk to the press."

A couple of days after Wayne Chrebet is knocked senseless by the Giants, he is sluggish and tired, and his head aches. "It was stupid, trying to get back out there," he says. "That's just me trying to convince them and myself that everything is all right." The Jets staff, including Pellman and Barr, diagnose Chrebet with postconcussion syndrome. Ten days after the game, the Jets place Chrebet on injured reserve.

Pellman makes no apologies. "Wayne returned and was fine," he tells the media. "He did not suffer additional injury. If he had suffered additional injury, his prognosis would be no different.

"Let's say I didn't allow him to return to play, and he played the following week," he continues. "The same thing could have happened. The decision about Wayne returning to play was based on scientific evaluation. As we stand now, that decision made no difference as to what's happening today.

"This decision is so that I can sleep well at night and so Wayne's wife can sleep well at night," he says about ending Chrebet's season.

"Nobody gets second-guessed."

IN OCTOBER 2003, Pellman and members of his committee published the first of a long-running series on concussions in Neurosurgery, a scholarly journal edited by Mike Apuzzo, the New York Giants' neurosurgical consultant. The committee's earliest studies used crash test dummies to reenact helmet blows. Later, the group decided to explore the ill effects of multiple concussions, and Pellman charged one of its members, Mark Lovell, head of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center's Sports Medicine Concussion Program, to oversee the collection and analysis of leaguewide data. Pellman chose Lovell because he had conducted neuropsychological tests for the Steelers as early as 1993. And in 1995, Lovell began to run the NFL's neuropsychology program, which encouraged teams to gather data to help decide when to return players to games.

Vis
05-22-2012, 04:22 PM
Using the information they would obtain, Pellman, Lovell and the committee planned to look at baseline results and identify a normal range of scores for uninjured NFL players. Then, comparing postinjury scores to baseline data would show the effects of concussions. Comparing data from players with multiple concussions to that of all injured players would show whether concussive effects changed as injuries accumulated.

A lot was riding on the analysis. The committee had never imposed recommendations on team medical staffs. But this was the first study ever to analyze the brain function of NFL athletes. If it showed that concussions were significantly impairing players, the league might be forced to institute new rules for evaluating and treating head injuries. Pellman and Lovell both say they invited all teams to participate in the research (Lovell says 11 teams elected to join the study) and tried to collect as many results as they could. As Lovell puts it, "More data is always better." Several of the doctors involved, however, tell a different story. Barr, for example, conducted 217 baseline tests from 1996 to 2001. Periodically, he forwarded results to the league, but at the time Barr learned the committee was planning to publish its results, he had sent only 149. Barr remembers finding Pellman in the Jets' training room in 2003 and saying, "Elliot, I haven't sent data for a year." According to Barr, Pellman didn't want the additional tests. "I don't want the data to be biased because I'm with the Jets," Barr recalls him saying, suggesting that additional results would skew the data because the Jets would be overrepresented in the sample. That made no sense to Barr. A scientific study should include, or at least address, all available data.

Pellman denies this conversation ever took place. "Bill Barr was a consultant for the Jets who tested individual players to help us make decisions," he says. "I did not discuss the committee's research with him." Whoever is right, the fact is the group didn't have all of Barr's data for its paper.

Barr's wasn't the only research that didn't make the cut. Over the period covered by the committee's research, Christopher Randolph, a Chicago neuropsychologist, collected baselines for 287 Bears players. He says Lovell never asked for his data, either.

Nor did the committee seek complete data from John Woodard, neuropsychologist for the Falcons and associate psychology professor at the Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science in North Chicago. According to Woodard, in December 2003, Lovell said the league was pressuring him to compile team results. "I was asked to provide data on only concussed players," Woodard says. "I had data for slightly more than 200 baseline evaluations. I don't know why I was not asked for them."

In 2004, Lovell also asked Richard Naugle, consultant to the Browns and head neuropsychologist at the Cleveland Clinic, for data on just the players who had already suffered concussions, according to an e-mail Naugle wrote to a colleague in March 2005. Naugle declined to comment for this story, citing a confidentiality deal between his medical group and the NFL, but The Magazine has obtained a copy of that message. "I don't have that sorted out from the results of other testing," Naugle wrote of the request. "I explained that and added that if he could name players, I could send data on those individuals. I recall sending him data on two or three players … I have a few hundred baselines."

This means Pellman, Lovell and their colleagues didn't include at least 850 baseline test results in their research—more than the 655 that ultimately made it into their 2004 Neurosurgery paper. At best, their numbers were incomplete. At worst, they were biased. "That's news to me," Lovell says now. "My job was to collect as much data as I could."

In an Oct. 22 letter to The Magazine he wrote that "at no point was there ever an attempt to exclude teams from participating. Not only is this counterintuitive with regard to the goals of the project, but this assertion seems to suggest that there was an effort to suppress the collection of data for the study." The letter continues, "This is completely baseless. If there is data that was not included, I either did not know about its existence, the team and/or neuropsychologist did not want to participate, or the data fell outside the time parameters."

Barr also claims that in December 2003, Pellman asked him for data on specific Jets. "One day he doesn't want my data, the next he does," Barr thought at the time. He feared that Pellman might be "trying to fill certain cells and not others." According to a fax Barr sent Pellman on Dec. 4, 2003, Pellman had inquired specifically about Fred

Baxter, who last played for the Jets in 2000; about Kyle Brady, who hadn't been with the team since 1998; and about Keyshawn Johnson, whose last season as a Jet was 1999. It's hard to see how Pellman could have wanted the three records for anything that had to do with ongoing care because he was no longer treating those players. Rather than collecting all available information to see where it led, Barr was concerned that Pellman might be picking and choosing what to include to get results that would downplay the effects of concussions.

Pellman denies it all. "Team doctors talk to specialists and ask them for results all the time," he says. "It's part of their job."

PELLMAN, LOVELL and their colleagues published their sixth paper in Neurosurgery in December 2004. It examined baseline data on 655 players and results for 95 players who had undergone both baseline testing and postconcussion testing. It concluded that NFL players did not show a decline in brain function after suffering concussions. Further analysis found no ill effects among those who had three or more concussions or who took hits to the head that kept them out for a week or more. The paper didn't explain where the players in the groups came from specifically or why certain players were included and hundreds of others were not. Neither Pellman nor Lovell has provided those details since.

Like most academic journals, Neurosurgery publishes work that has been peer-reviewed. Other scientists evaluate the design and execution of the studies, though they don't vouch for the accuracy of the data presented. Unlike most academic journals, though, Neurosurgery allows those peers to print their comments directly following the studies. In the case of the committee's sixth paper, even without any evidence of missing tests, the reviews were harsh. "When you look at the comments, what's striking is how strongly they are worded," says Chris Nowinski, author of Head Games: Football's Concussion Crisis. "They're full of phrases like 'perplexing,' 'obvious problems' and 'overinterpreted.' But the media reports what studies find, not what reviewers write."

The decision to publish the paper was controversial. "I highly doubt this study would have seen the light of day at this journal were it not for the subject matter of NFL players," says Robert Cantú, chief of neurosurgery and director of sports medicine at Emerson Hospital in Concord, Mass., and a senior editor at Neurosurgery. "The extremely small sample size and voluntary participation suggest there was bias in choosing the sample. The findings are extremely preliminary at best, and no conclusions should be drawn from them at this time."

One of the scientists who reviewed the committee's work is equally blunt. "They're basically trying to prepare a defense for when one of these players sues," he says. "They are trying to say that what's done in the NFL is okay because in their studies, it doesn't look like bad things are happening from concussions. But the studies are flawed beyond belief."

The same month the sixth paper was published, Barr gave a lecture at a conference sponsored by the Brain Injury Association of New York at Madison Square Garden. By then, he had joined the Comprehensive Epilepsy Center at NYU. In addition to his work there and with the Jets, he recently had been part of a research team that looked at concussions in nearly 3,000 college athletes. At the Garden, Barr talked about some of the findings from that NCAA study. He said the research indicated that the best time to do neuropsychological tests on players with concussions was after their symptoms had completely cleared, usually five to 10 days after the trauma.

A week or so later, Barr says Pellman called him and said, "I understand you're badmouthing the league." Barr realized Pellman was referring to the remarks he had made at the conference. Although that speech had been about college athletes, Pellman didn't like Barr's recommendations. NFL teams, Barr understood, preferred testing players just one to two days after a concussion, allowing for quicker diagnoses and returns to play.

"In the future," Barr says Pellman told him, "if you have anything to present or publish about sports concussions, you will have to put it through me." Barr protested that as a professor and a scientist, he couldn't be expected to clear material that wasn't Jets-related with Pellman.

"Then your time with the Jets is over," Pellman said. And, Pellman added, if Barr ever tried to publish any of his NFL data, he would hear from the league's lawyers. Barr was so concerned about the conversation that on April 29, 2005, he detailed it in a two-page letter to Richard Levin, his dean at the NYU School of Medicine.

Pellman heatedly denies Barr's account. "I never, never, never told Bill Barr he would have to clear all his work through me," he says. "I have people working for me all over the country, and I haven't put restrictions on them like that. It's ridiculous." Pellman confirms that he fired Barr but won't say why. "He was terminated because of certain events, which I will not go into other than to say he was a good neuropsychologist," Pellman says. "I do not need to air my dirty laundry in public."

But others too have felt Pellman's wrath. In November 2003, UNC's Guskiewicz was scheduled to appear on HBO's Inside the NFL to discuss his research that showed a link between multiple concussions and depression in 2,488 former pro football players. Pellman, who was also going to be on the show, called Guskiewicz. "I had never spoken with him before, and he attacked me from the getgo," Guskiewicz says. "He questioned whether it was in my best interest to do the show. He was a bull in a china shop."

On the program, Pellman said flatly, "When I look at that study, I don't believe it." Later, however, Pellman announced the league would begin to look into the long-term effects of concussions. "It's typical for them to say they will do their own study," says West Virginia's Bailes. Adds one of the scientists researching the long-term effects of concussions: "It has to be Elliot's idea for it to be a good idea."

In January 2005, Pellman's committee published its seventh research paper on concussions. It stated: "Return to play does not involve a significant risk of a second injury either in the same game or during the season."

Back at NYU, Barr was disappointed. "Their conclusions were totally at odds with my experience," he says. "I can't believe you could have Wayne Chrebet on your team and conclude there is no increased risk of concussions." Barr is criticizing the committee publicly now for the first time because he thinks its recommendations are dangerous. "I believe the findings of the NFL, as published, are definitely putting players at risk," he says. "The wrong message is getting out."

Wayne Chrebet's head whiplashes and smashes into the ground after he makes a six-yard catch on third and five in the fourth quarter of a tight game, Jets vs. Chargers on Nov. 6, 2005, at the Meadowlands.

He has a faraway look in his eyes as he hobbles off the field. After the game, a trainer has to help him take off his uniform. A day later, the Jets put Chrebet on IR again. The injury is at least the sixth time in his NFL tenure that Chrebet has taken a blow to the head serious enough for him to miss a game.

By 2006, Chrebet will own a bar across the street from the Jets' practice field and do postgame analysis for Jets games on local cable.

But he never plays again.

PELLMAN'S COMMITTEE is up to 13 papers now, and the league continues to disregard what other researchers are finding. "If the NFL ever had to bring their practices in line with the rest of the literature, they'd have to change everything about the way they operate," says Head Games author Nowinski. "They could no longer make heroes of the guys who go back in after getting concussions. It would turn their game on its head."

Meanwhile, players risk serious, lasting head injuries each week. Last year's Wayne Chrebet is this year's Dan Morgan. The NFL has to decide how much longer it can afford to send players back into games after they've been knocked out. How much longer it wants to tell players that multiple concussions pose no threat to their future mental health. And how much longer it wants to keep relying on Elliot Pellman's research to make its calls.

Vis
05-22-2012, 05:11 PM
Here's Pellman, the NFL former go to brain and concussion specialist:

http://www.mountsinai.org/profiles/elliot-pellman

He's a bloody, Rheumatologist. Find any mention of neurology in his credentials.

Vis
05-22-2012, 05:21 PM
Cast of Characters

Elliot Pellman, M.D. - Chair NFL MTBI Committee (through 2007)
Ira Casson, M.D. - new MTBI Committee Chair
Paul Tagliabue (past NFL Commissioner)
Troy Aikman, Steve Young, Wayne Chrebet - Fallen soldiers
William Barr, Ph.D. - past NY Jets Npsych
Michael Apuzzo, M.D. - Editor, Neurosurgery, Jets Npsych Consultant
Mark Lovell, Ph.D. - Founder, Director NFL concussion program
Chris Randolph, Ph.D. - Chicago Bears Npsych

NFL MTBI Committee Findings

does not involve significant risk of a second injury either in the same game or during the season.

no evidence of worsening injury or chronic cumulative effects of multiple MTBIs in NFL players.

In practice, according to Pellman's committee, 51.7% of players who suffer concussions -- including a quarter of those who are knocked out -- return in the same game. Pellman has written that "many NFL players can be safely allowed to return to play on the day of injury" and that "the current decisionmaking of NFL team physicians seems appropriate for return to the game after a concussion."

NFL players did not show a decline in brain function after suffering concussions. Further analysis found no ill effects among those who had three or more concussions or who took hits to the head that kept them out for a week or more.

Contradictions

Authors of NFL article dispute the findings: NY Times

2003 NCAA study of 2,905 college football players found just the opposite: Those who have suffered concussions are more susceptible to further head trauma for seven to 10 days after the injury.

2003 report by the Center for the Study of Retired Athletes at the University of North Carolina found a link between multiple concussions and depression among former pro players with histories of concussions.

2005 follow-up study at the Center showed a connection between concussions and both brain impairment and Alzheimer's disease among retired NFL players.

"Pellman's committee has repeatedly questioned and disagreed with the findings of researchers who didn't come from their own injury group," says Julian Bailes, chairman of neurosurgery at West Virginia University.
The Second International Conference on Concussion in Sport met in Prague in 2004 and released the following statement: "When a player shows ANY symptoms or signs of a concussion ... the player should not be allowed to return to play in the current game or practice ... When in doubt, sit them out!"

...some of the findings from that NCAA study. He said the research indicated that the best time to do neuropsychological tests on players with concussions was after their symptoms had completely cleared, usually five to 10 days after the trauma.

Players who recalled one or two concussions were 11/2 times more likely to be diagnosed with depression, said Kevin Guskiewicz, research director of the University of North Carolina's Center for the Study of Retired Athletes.
(in response) NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told The Associated Pres that the study, while interesting, "does not prove anything, and we want to know more." Aiello said the league is spending $2 million to conduct its own study of retired players.

Controversies

Pellman is a rheumatologist by training -- a specialist in the treatment of joints and muscles -- not a neurologist. For another, when he started out, he often professed ignorance about the subject in question. "I would hear him say things in speeches like, 'I don't know much about concussions, I learn from my players,' and, 'We as a field don't know much about concussions,' and it used to bother me," says one doctor. "We knew what to do about concussions, but he was acting like it was new ground." Their dismay has only increased since The New York Times revealed last year that Pellman attended medical school in Guadalajara, Mexico, and does not hold a medical degree from SUNY Stony Brook, as he once claimed. "When neuropsychologists sit around telling jokes, we call him 'Mr. Pellman,' " says a colleague.

Pellman, Lovell and the committee planned to look at baseline results and identify a normal range of scores for uninjured NFL players. Then, comparing postinjury scores to baseline data would show the effects of concussions. Comparing data from players with multiple concussions to that of all injured players would show whether concussive effects changed as injuries accumulated.

the first study ever to analyze the brain function of NFL athletes.

If it showed that concussions were significantly impairing players, the league might be forced to institute new rules for evaluating and treating head injuries.

Pellman and Lovell both say they invited all teams to participate in the research (Lovell says 11 teams elected to join the study) and tried to collect as many results as they could. As Lovell puts it, "More data is always better."
Barr, for example, conducted 217 baseline tests from 1996 to 2001. Periodically, he forwarded results to the league, but at the time Barr learned the committee was planning to publish its results, he had sent only 149.
Barr remembers finding Pellman in the Jets' training room in 2003 and saying, "Elliot, I haven't sent data for a year."

According to Barr, Pellman didn't want the additional tests. "I don't want the data to be biased because I'm with the Jets," Barr recalls him saying, suggesting that additional results would skew the data because the Jets would be overrepresented in the sample. That made no sense to Barr. A scientific study should include, or at least address, all available data.

Barr's wasn't the only research that didn't make the cut. Over the period covered by the committee's research, Christopher Randolph, a Chicago neuropsychologist, collected baselines for 287 Bears players. He says Lovell never asked for his data, either.

Nor did the committee seek complete data from John Woodard, neuropsychologist for the Falcons and associate psychology professor at the Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science in North Chicago. According to Woodard, in December 2003, Lovell said the league was pressuring him to compile team results. "I was asked to provide data on only concussed players," Woodard says. "I had data for slightly more than 200 baseline evaluations. I don't know why I was not asked for them."

In 2004, Lovell also asked Richard Naugle, consultant to the Browns and head neuropsychologist at the Cleveland Clinic, for data on just the players who had already suffered concussions, according to an e-mail Naugle wrote to a colleague in March 2005.

This means Pellman, Lovell and their colleagues didn't include at least 850 baseline test results in their research -- more than the 655 that ultimately made it into their 2004 Neurosurgery paper. At best, their numbers were incomplete. At worst, they were biased. "That's news to me," Lovell says now. "My job was to collect as much data as I could."

In an Oct. 22 letter to The Magazine he wrote that "at no point was there ever an attempt to exclude teams from participating. Not only is this counterintuitive with regard to the goals of the project, but this assertion seems to suggest that there was an effort to suppress the collection of data for the study." The letter continues, "This is completely baseless. If there is data that was not included, I either did not know about its existence, the team and/or neuropsychologist did not want to participate, or the data fell outside the time parameters."

In November 2003, UNC's Guskiewicz was scheduled to appear on HBO's Inside the NFL to discuss his research that showed a link between multiple concussions and depression in 2,488 former pro football players. Pellman, who was also going to be on the show, called Guskiewicz. "I had never spoken with him before, and he attacked me from the get-go," Guskiewicz says. "He questioned whether it was in my best interest to do the show. He was a bull in a china shop."... On the program, Pellman said flatly, "When I look at that study, I don't believe it."

The Journal

Like most academic journals, Neurosurgery publishes work that has been peer-reviewed. Other scientists evaluate the design and execution of the studies, though they don't vouch for the accuracy of the data presented. Unlike most academic journals, though, Neurosurgery allows those peers to print their comments directly following the studies. In the case of the committee's sixth paper, even without any evidence of missing tests, the reviews were harsh. "When you look at the comments, what's striking is how strongly they are worded," says Chris Nowinski, author of Head Games: Football's Concussion Crisis. "They're full of phrases like 'perplexing,' 'obvious problems' and 'overinterpreted.' But the media reports what studies find, not what reviewers write."

The decision to publish the paper was controversial. "I highly doubt this study would have seen the light of day at this journal were it not for the subject matter of NFL players," says Robert Cantu, chief of neurosurgery and director of sports medicine at Emerson Hospital in Concord, Mass., and a senior editor at Neurosurgery.

JAT Article

Article
Lovell Comments: link
Authors respond: link
Players Comments

I can't help but look at the concussions I sustained as a reason for the headaches, the depression, the blurred vision, the slurred speech that I might have at some times," Hall of Fame linebacker Harry Carson told Outside the Lines. Carson, who played for the Giants from 1976 to 1988, continued, "When I look back at the many hits I inflicted on people and at some of the hits I have gotten, it becomes clear to me that not only was I abusing my body, I was also abusing the gray matter in my skull."

"Six weeks after I was forced to retire, when I had started to feel better, I had an appearance at a wine-tasting event," says the ESPN analyst. "The moment the wine touched my lips, I went blind for the most terrifying 10 seconds of my life. My doctor later explained I had probably suffered trauma in the vision area of my brain. I think that speaks to the cumulative effects."

"I took a blow to the head during a Monday-night game for the Bears against the Chiefs, and I had amnesia on the plane ride home five or six hours later," Hoge says. "That's when the team doctors decided my return-to-play date. Four days later I was practicing, and I realized I was struggling with learning new plays." Five weeks into the 1994 season, Hoge took another hit, walked off the field and into the locker room, and passed out. For about 15 seconds, he even stopped breathing. "I had to learn how to read again," he says. "You could take me around the block and I'd never get home."

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 05:23 PM
I do accuse them of pushing bad research. They have admitted it was wrong. All legitimate science disagrees with it. No one is defending those findings not even the man who ran the committee. I didn't have to come down on 1 of 2 sides here, there's only 1 side. I did throw in colorful language to lighten the mood.

There is only "one side" to your contention that the NFL is using the CBA preemption argument to "conceal fraudulent behavior."?:noidea:

If you want to contend the plaintiffs should prevail go for it but any contention that you have not picked a side and decided who should prevail in this litigation is nonsense :drink:

Vis
05-22-2012, 05:27 PM
There is only "one side" to your contention that the NFL is using the CBA preemption argument to "conceal fraudulent behavior."?:noidea:

If you want to contend the plaintiffs should prevail go for it but any contention that you have not picked a side and decided who should prevail in this litigation is nonsense :drink:

The CBA argument isn't on the merits of the claim at all. It's an attempt not to reach the merits.

What type of lawyer again? Dirt lawyer? Tax?

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 05:55 PM
The CBA argument isn't on the merits of the claim at all. It's an attempt not to reach the merits.


Well - that is sort of what dispositive motions are intended to achieve - as you well know, just because a defendant is seeking to dismiss a case on a premption argument does not mean it otherwise is liable for the alleged misconduct

See e.g. Stringer v. NFL, et al., 474 F.Supp.2d 894, 915 fn. 11 (S.D. Ohio 2007) ("Nothing in this opinion should be construed as indicative of the Court's views concerning the ultimate merits of these claims.")

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=20071368474FSupp2d894_11278. xml

Vis
05-22-2012, 06:01 PM
Well - that is sort of what dispositive motions are intended to achieve - as you well know, just because a defendant is seeking to dismiss a case on a premption argument does not mean it otherwise is liable for the alleged misconduct

See e.g. Stringer v. NFL, et al., 474 F.Supp.2d 894, 915 fn. 11 (S.D. Ohio 2007) ("Nothing in this opinion should be construed as indicative of the Court's views concerning the ultimate merits of these claims.")

http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=20071368474FSupp2d894_11278. xml

True, and I understand your love of contracts now but you can't contract out of fraud and the attempt will open a counterclaim that the CBA negotiations were not undertaken in good faith if negotiated with an eye on this outcome.

Any thoughts on why the NFL would have picked Pellman if they really wanted the best answers medical science could provide? Does it not appear, just appear, to you that the NFL wanted a certain answer so they picked the guys to give it to them? Sure others do that too - tobacco etc...but it being old hat doesn't make it right. What do you think on the merits here.

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 06:16 PM
True, and I understand your love of contracts now but you can't contract out of fraud and the attempt will open a counterclaim that the CBA negotiations were not undertaken in good faith if negotiated with an eye on this outcome.

Any thoughts on why the NFL would have picked Pellman if they really wanted the best answers medical science could provide? Does it not appear, just appear, to you that the NFL wanted a certain answer so they picked the guys to give it to them? Sure others do that too - tobacco etc...but it being old hat doesn't make it right. What do you think on the merits here.

I think this is a fair analysis of how this is not a slam dunk for either side

Head Hunters: The Rise of Neurological Concussions in American Football and Its Legal Implications

http://harvardjsel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Carrabis.pdf

The Stringer decision I cited above ( a wrongful death action) indicates how tough the preemption hurdle can be to get over

Vis
05-22-2012, 06:26 PM
I think this is a fair analysis of how this is not a slam dunk for either side

Head Hunters: The Rise of Neurological Concussions in American Football and Its Legal Implications

http://harvardjsel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Carrabis.pdf

The Stringer decision I cited above ( a wrongful death action) indicates how tough the preemption hurdle can be to get over

Missed where you answered my question. It wasnt in the note or the case.

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 06:46 PM
The merits of the case or the merits of whom the NFL has used in the past?

IMO the NFL and the players both have known it is a dangerous game and neither side is pretending to be running a teaching hospital - the NFL is not going to knowingly make the same mistakes as Big Tobacco but tobacco is still with us a half century after the Surgeon General's report rather than being a controlled substance. So you can write a big check and still be in business under the right circumstances

My bet is you end up with a CBA section 88 on steroids that is funded to pay any player with some demonstrated cognitive impairment regardless of causation - kind of like the way the federal black lung program ended up paying lots of miners who may have had respiratory impairment as well as a pack a day cigarette habit but were not proven to have coal workers pneumoconiosis that the statute was intended to compensate

Vis
05-22-2012, 06:51 PM
The merits of the case or the merits of whom the NFL has used in the past?

IMO the NFL and the players both have known it is a dangerous game and neither side is pretending to be running a teaching hospital - the NFL is not going to knowingly make the same mistakes as Big Tobacco but tobacco is still with us a half century after the Surgeon General's report rather than being a controlled substance. So you can write a big check and still be in business under the right circumstances

My bet is you end up with a CBA section 88 on steroids that is funded to pay any player with some demonstrated cognitive impairment regardless of causation - kind of like the way the federal black lung program ended up paying lots of miners who may have had respiratory impairment as well as a pack a day cigarette habit but were not proven to have coal workers pneumoconiosis that the statute was intended to compensate

Why do you not think Pellman's studies are An example of the NFL repeating tobaccos strategies?

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 07:16 PM
Why do you not think Pellman's studies are An example of the NFL repeating tobaccos strategies?

Because when Big Tobacco did it they thought they could get away with it and left the paper trail - during the past half-century IMO organizations recognize litigation is always a factor and manage their operations accordingly. Perlman knew who was paying him without having to be told what to conclude.

There might be an e-mail trail out there but maybe not - the NFL is not that large an organization and it is a lot easier to "educate" a smaller organization on appropriate
"document retention" practices

Plus in this case it is as if the smokers were employees of Phillip Morris - everyone is part of the same hypocrisy

SjbPi00k_ME

Vis
05-22-2012, 07:22 PM
I disagree. Players didn't know the risk. Some still won't believe. Look at the lack of knowledge on brain injuries on Internet forums. Why would players know more? NFL knew more, or should have known and the league is vicariously liable for that knowledge at the very least. I think they had actual knowledge and took action to hide it including the bs reports. I think this is part of the reason for goodell's actions the last 3 years. He's taking subsequent remedial measures.

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 07:35 PM
I disagree. Players didn't know the risk. Some still won't believe. Look at the lack of knowledge on brain injuries on Internet forums. Why would players know more? NFL knew more, or should have known and the league is vicariously liable for that knowledge at the very least. I think they had actual knowledge and took action to hide it including the bs reports. I think this is part of the reason for goodell's actions the last 3 years. He's taking subsequent remedial measures.

Before Goodell, Tagliabue was the commissioner. Before Tagliabue was the commissioner he was a partner at Covington & Burling and Rozelle's consigliere. It is not as if the league was run by former sportswriters until Goodell showed up

The NFL has spent a big part of the last three decades in court and knows the perils of litigation. IMO the league will need to pay some significant $$$ but I do not think it will get to the point the lawsuits will not get resolved in a manner acceptable to the league.

The long term problem for the league is that parents are afraid their sons will be brain damaged if they play football and only poor folks play the sport as a way to hopefully at least get a scholarship.

JPPT1974
05-22-2012, 08:25 PM
Wonder how much that the players will be filing like it could, would not be surprising if it ended up a lawsuit in-between $100M-$300M. As more and more players will be coming forward with lawsuits.

Atlanta Dan
05-22-2012, 08:47 PM
Wonder how much that the players will be filing like it could, would not be surprising if it ended up a lawsuit in-between $100M-$300M. As more and more players will be coming forward with lawsuits.

Approximately 2000 players have filed suit. $100,000 a plaintiff works out to $200 million.

It''s a minimum billion dollar case after you cost out getting the attorneys their 40% fee to cover all players in the class

Vis
05-23-2012, 07:14 AM
Approximately 2000 players have filed suit. $100,000 a plaintiff works out to $200 million.

It''s a minimum billion dollar case after you cost out getting the attorneys their 40% fee to cover all players in the class

That's not the way class actions work and only some are class actions. Expect a settlement that establishes a pension type fund and requires lifetime care for players with a proven brain injury and and independent panel to decide if it's proven. The NFL has a history of denying obviously related injuries. Individual players recovery will vary. The first big fights will be about consolidation. The NFL will want them all in Philly under 1 judge. And they will want a settlement of the class to bind future claimants.

Atlanta Dan
05-23-2012, 08:03 AM
That's not the way class actions work and only some are class actions. Expect a settlement that establishes a pension type fund and requires lifetime care for players with a proven brain injury and and independent panel to decide if it's proven. The NFL has a history of denying obviously related injuries. Individual players recovery will vary. The first big fights will be about consolidation. The NFL will want them all in Philly under 1 judge. And they will want a settlement of the class to bind future claimants.

Thanks for the civil procedure lecture Vis - seeing as it was me who posted the link here to the league's motion filied in the USDC ED PA I am aware of the league's interet in MDL.

My point is the NFL is going to need to write a big enough check that satisfies the plaintiffs and covers the plaintiffs' fees out of any settlement. I assume you agree the plaintiffs' attorneys here probably have a contingent fee arrangement if this site reflects how plaintiffs' attornys are securing clients for these cases
("There are no costs whatsoever to becoome involved in any of the lawsuits.")

http://www.playerinjury.com/?tw_p=twt

Those attornsy are going to want to get paid out of settlement proceeds. Future claimants can go before a disability panel but the attorneys who have filed suit to date are not doing this pro bono

What value do you place on the NFL buying peace in this case?.

Vis
05-23-2012, 08:53 AM
Thanks for the civil procedure lecture Vis - seeing as it was me who posted the link here to the league's motion filied in the USDC ED PA I am aware of the league's interet in MDL.

My point is the NFL is going to need to write a big enough check that satisfies the plaintiffs and covers the plaintiffs' fees out of any settlement. I assume you agree the plaintiffs' attorneys here probably have a contingent fee arrangement if this site reflects how plaintiffs' attornys are securing clients for these cases
("There are no costs whatsoever to becoome involved in any of the lawsuits.")

http://www.playerinjury.com/?tw_p=twt

Those attornsy are going to want to get paid out of settlement proceeds. Future claimants can go before a disability panel but the attorneys who have filed suit to date are not doing this pro bono

What value do you place on the NFL buying peace in this case?.

Sure the plaintiff's lawyers have a contingency agreement. it's the only way the plaintiffs can afford to hire them. the NFL will pay on an hourly basis. The defense lawyers get paid, win or lose and the plaintiff's lawyers take a bath on all the time and costs if they lose. Even with a victory, I bet the plaintiff's lawyers have lower fees than the defense lawyers.

The suits I read don't just ask for money and I'm not sure what you mean by the NFL will have to write a check big enough to satisfy the plaintiffs. Settlements are compromises based on each parties assessments of the risk of going forward. What it won't be is a single and equal dollar amount per plaintiff like you posted be it $100,000.00 or any other amount.

The NFL has money. Don't worry there. If you want a worry, consider the possible terms of the injunctive relief.

Hawaii 5-0
06-07-2012, 01:29 PM
Mega-lawsuit says NFL hid brain injury links

By MARYCLAIRE DALE - Associated Press
June 7, 2012

PHILADELPHIA (AP) -- A concussion-related lawsuit bringing together scores of cases has been filed in federal court, accusing the NFL of hiding information that linked football-related head trauma to permanent brain injuries.

Lawyers for former players say more than 80 pending lawsuits are consolidated in the "master complaint" filed Thursday in Philadelphia.

Plaintiffs hope to hold the NFL responsible for the care of players suffering from dementia, Alzheimer's disease and other neurological conditions. Other former players remain asymptomatic, but worry about the future and want medical monitoring. The helmet-maker Riddell, Inc. also is named as a defendant.

"I want this game to be around, to be a great sport, a sport that my own boys will be able to play and enjoy all the benefits I believe that football has," said former Eagles and Patriots running back Kevin Turner, now suffering from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

"Let's face it and be honest, I feel like the NFL has over the past decades - at least until `08 or `09 - kind of turned a blind eye to the seriousness of not only concussions ... but the cumulative effect of (hits) and how these retired players are having so much difficulty in getting along in their daily lives."

The suit accuses the NFL of "mythologizing" and glorifying violence through the media, including its NFL Films division.

"The NFL, like the sport of boxing, was aware of the health risks associated with repetitive blows producing sub-concussive and concussive results and the fact that some members of the NFL player population were at significant risk of developing long-term brain damage and cognitive decline as a result," the complaint charges.

"Despite its knowledge and controlling role in governing player conduct on and off the field, the NFL turned a blind eye to the risk and failed to warn and/or impose safety regulations governing this well-recognized health and safety problem."

The league has denied similar accusations in the past.

"Our legal team will review today's filing that is intended to consolidate plaintiffs' existing claims into one `master' complaint," the NFL said in a statement. "The NFL has long made player safety a priority and continues to do so. Any allegation that the NFL sought to mislead players has no merit. It stands in contrast to the league's many actions to better protect players and advance the science and medical understanding of the management and treatment of concussions."

The NFL provides a series of medical benefits to former NFL players to help them after football, including joint replacement, neurological evaluations and spine treatment programs, assisted living partnerships, long-term care insurance, prescription benefits, life insurance programs, and a Medicare supplement program.

One of the programs, the 88 Plan, named after Hall of Fame tight end John Mackey, provides funding to treat dementia, Alzheimer's disease, and ALS. Players do not need to demonstrate that the condition was caused by their participation in the NFL.

The league says that in partnership with the NFLPA it has spent more than a billion dollars on pensions, medical and disability benefits for retired players.

Mary Ann Easterling will remain a plaintiff despite the April suicide of her husband, former Atlanta Falcons safety Ray Easterling, who had been a named plaintiff in a suit filed last year.

Easterling, 62, suffered from undiagnosed dementia for many years that left him angry and volatile, his widow said. He acted out of character, behaving oddly at family parties and making risky business decisions that eventually cost them their home. They were married 36 years and had one daughter. She believes the NFL has no idea what families go through.

"I wish I could sit down with (NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell) and share with him the pain. It's not just the spouses, it's the kids, too," Easterling, 59, told The Associated Press from her home in Richmond, Va. "Kids don't understand why Dad is angry all the time."

Ray Easterling played for the Falcons from 1972 to 1979, helping to lead the team's "Gritz Blitz" defense in 1977 that set the NFL record for fewest points allowed in a season. He never earned more than $75,000 from the sport, his widow said. After his football career, he started a financial services company, but had to abandon the career in about 1990, plagued by insomnia and depression, she said.

"I think the thing that was so discouraging was just the denial by the NFL," Mary Ann Easterling said. "His sentiment toward the end was that if he had a choice to do it all over again, he wouldn't (play). ... He was realizing how fast he was going downhill."

The list of notable former players connected to concussion lawsuits is extensive and includes the family of Dave Duerson, who shot himself last year. Ex-quarterback Jim McMahon, Duerson's teammate on Super Bowl-winning 1985 Chicago Bears, also has been among the plaintiffs.

The cases are being consolidated for pretrial issues and discovery before Senior U.S. District Judge Anita B. Brody in Philadelphia.

The players accuse the NFL of negligence and intentional misconduct in its response to the headaches, dizziness and dementia that former players have reported, even after forming the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Committee to study the issue in 1994.

"After voluntarily assuming a duty to investigate, study, and truthfully report to the public and NFL players, including the Plaintiffs, the medical risks associated with MTBI in football, the NFL instead produced industry-funded, biased, and falsified research that falsely claimed that concussive and sub-concussive head impacts in football do not present serious, life-altering risks," the complaint says.

The problem of concussions in the NFL has moved steadily into the litigation phase for about a year.

According to an AP review of 81 lawsuits filed through May 25, the plaintiffs include 2,138 former players. The total number of plaintiffs in those cases is 3,356, which includes players, spouses and other relatives or representatives.

Some of the plaintiffs are named in more than one complaint, but the AP count did not include duplicated names in its total. The master suit contains a provision to allow other players to join it as plaintiffs and attorneys expect that to happen.

"We want to see them take care of the players," Mary Ann Easterling said.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/F/FBN_CONCUSSION_LAWSUITS?SITE=PAPIT&SECTION=SPORTS&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Atlanta Dan
06-07-2012, 06:54 PM
Game on

PLAINTIFFS’ MASTER ADMINISTRATIVE LONG-FORM COMPLAINT

The NFL Has Mythologized Violence Through the Media.
50. Part of the NFL Defendants’ strategy to promote NFL football is: (a) to mythologize players and Teams; (b) to glorify the accomplishments of individuals and Teams; and (c) to glorify the brutality and ferocity of NFL football, by lauding and mythologizing the most brutal and ferocious players and collisions, and simultaneously propagating the fraudulent representation that “getting your bell rung,” “being dinged” and putting big hits on others is a badge of courage and does not seriously threaten one’s health....

The NFL Markets and Glorifies Football’s Violence Through NFL Films.
53. NFL Films is an agent and instrumentality of the NFL Defendants devoted to producing promotional films for the NFL. One television critic described NFL Films as “the greatest in-house P.R. machine in pro sports history… an outfit that could make even a tedious stalemate seem as momentous as the battle for the Alamo.”...

55. The NFL focuses on violence as one of the NFL’s greatest selling points: the football player as gladiator. To advance the NFL Defendants’ purpose, NFL Films has created numerous highlight features that focus solely on the hardest-hits that take place on the football field. These featured videos are marketed and sold to advance the NFL’s culture of violence as entertainment....

The NFL Was and Is in a Superior Position of Knowledge and Authority and Owed a Duty to Players
84. At all times, the NFL’s unique historical vantage point at the apex of the sport of football, paired with its unmatched resources as the most well-funded organization devoted to the business of the game, has afforded it unparalleled access to data relating the effect of head impacts on football players and made it an institutional repository of decades of accumulated knowledge about head injuries to players.
85. The NFL’s accumulated knowledge about head injuries to players, and the associated health risks therefrom, was at all times vastly superior to that readily available to the Plaintiffs.

The NFL Knew the Dangers and Risks Associated with Repetitive Head Impacts and Concussions
108. For decades, the NFL has been aware that multiple blows to the head can lead to longterm brain injury, including but not limited to memory loss, dementia, depression, and CTE and its related symptoms.

The NFL Voluntarily Undertook the Responsibility of Studying Head Impacts In Football,
Yet Fraudulently Concealed Their Long-Term Effects.
148. In 1994, then NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue agreed to fund a committee to study the issue of head injury in the NFL. The NFL voluntarily and unilaterally proceeded to form the committee to study the issue. This Committee, the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Committee (“MTBI Committee”) voluntarily undertook the responsibility of studying the effects of concussions and subconcussive injury on NFL players....

151. Rather than exercising reasonable care in these duties, the NFL immediately engaged in a long-running course of fraudulent and negligent conduct, which included a campaign of disinformation designed to (a) dispute accepted and valid neuroscience regarding the connection between repetitive traumatic brain injuries and concussions and degenerative brain disease such as CTE; and (b) to create a falsified body of research which the NFL could cite as proof that truthful and accepted neuroscience on the subject was inconclusive and subject to doubt....

245. As a direct result of the fraudulent concealment and misrepresentations by the NFL,
former players have for many decades been led to believe that the symptoms of early-onset dementia, ALS, loss of memory, headaches, confusion, and the inability to function were not caused by events occurring while they played in the NFL. And, as a result of this willful and malicious conduct, these former players have been deprived of medical treatment, incurred expenses, lost employment, suffered humiliation and other damages to be specified.
http://nflconcussionlitigation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/NFL-Master-Complaint1.pdf

Hawaii 5-0
06-08-2012, 01:20 AM
Mega-lawsuit says NFL hid brain injury links

By Barry Wilner Ap Pro Football Writer
Published: Thursday, June 7, 2012

NEW YORK — Scores of lawsuits involving thousands of former players touched by concussions and brain injuries have been consolidated into one master complaint, setting up a massive and potentially costly case for the NFL.

Lawyers for the players filed the complaint Thursday in Philadelphia, accusing the NFL of hiding information that linked football-related head trauma to permanent brain injuries. Among the illnesses cited were dementia and Alzheimer’s disease.

The plaintiffs hope to hold the NFL responsible for the care of players suffering from those health problems.

“The NFL must open its eyes to the consequences of its actions,” said Kevin Turner, a former running back with the Patriots and Eagles who has been diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). “The NFL has the power not only to give former players the care they deserve, but also to ensure that future generations of football players do not suffer the way that many in my generation have.”

Also named in the suit was helmet-maker Riddell, Inc.

The suit accuses the NFL of “mythologizing” and glorifying violence through the media, including its NFL Films division.

“The NFL, like the sport of boxing, was aware of the health risks associated with repetitive blows producing sub-concussive and concussive results and the fact that some members of the NFL player population were at significant risk of developing long-term brain damage and cognitive decline as a result,” the complaint charges.

“Despite its knowledge and controlling role in governing player conduct on and off the field, the NFL turned a blind eye to the risk and failed to warn and/or impose safety regulations governing this well-recognized health and safety problem.”

In response, the NFL cited the many health programs it runs for current and former players, and a series of medical benefits to former NFL players to help them after football. Those include joint replacement, neurological evaluations and spine treatment programs, assisted living partnerships, long-term care insurance, prescription benefits, life insurance programs, and a Medicare supplement program.

“The NFL has long made player safety a priority and continues to do so,” the league said in a statement. “Any allegation that the NFL sought to mislead players has no merit. It stands in contrast to the league’s many actions to better protect players and advance the science and medical understanding of the management and treatment of concussions.”

The league added that in partnership with the NFL Players Association it has spent more than a billion dollars on pensions, medical and disability benefits for retired players.

Turner, however, sees little positive coming from those programs.

“For the longest time, about the first 10 years after I retired in January 2000, I thought I had just turned into a loser overnight,” he said. “I couldn’t figure out what was wrong. It was a very scary proposition — until I found out there were a lot more guys just like me. I find they had been through some of the same struggles. I realized this is no longer a coincidence.”

Attorneys for the players said they were not trying to tear apart the NFL, only to ensure that it lives up to its obligations to provide a safer sport. And that it offers proper care for those who have retired from the game.

Mary Ann Easterling echoed those thoughts.

She will remain a plaintiff despite the April suicide of her husband, former Atlanta Falcons safety Ray Easterling, who had been a named plaintiff in a suit filed last year. Easterling, 62, suffered from undiagnosed dementia for many years that left him angry and volatile, his widow said. He acted out of character, behaving oddly at family parties and making risky business decisions that eventually cost them their home. They were married 36 years and had one daughter. She believes the NFL has no idea what families go through.

“I wish I could sit down with (NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell) and share with him the pain. It’s not just the spouses, it’s the kids, too,” Easterling, 59, told The Associated Press from her home in Richmond, Va. “Kids don’t understand why Dad is angry all the time.

“I think the thing that was so discouraging was just the denial by the NFL.”

The list of notable former players connected to concussion lawsuits is extensive and includes the family of Dave Duerson, who shot himself last year.

According to an AP review of 81 lawsuits filed through May 25, the plaintiffs include 2,138 former players. The total number of plaintiffs in those cases is 3,356, which includes players, spouses and other relatives or representatives.

Some of the plaintiffs are named in more than one complaint, but the AP count did not include duplicated names in its total. The master suit contains a provision to allow other players to join it as plaintiffs and attorneys expect that to happen.

“I just want the NFL to stand up and be accountable for its actions,” Turner said. “That is how we can prevent more people from suffering and keeping this game that has plenty of benefits. But we can make it safer and I am hoping that’s what we do.”

http://triblive.com/sports/steelers/1935873-85/nfl-players-former-plaintiffs-benefits-brain-care-complaint-easterling-football

Hawaii 5-0
06-14-2012, 05:27 PM
Bradshaw thinks NFL doesn’t truly care about former players

Posted by Mike Florio on June 14, 2012,

http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/terry-bradshaw.jpg?w=241

The ongoing debate regarding whether current or former NFL players would let their sons play football continues.

This time, the comments come from a high-profile Hall of Famer with one small caveat: He doesn’t have a son.

“If I had a son today . . . I would not let him play football,” Terry Bradshaw told Jay Leno on The Tonight Show (via SportsBusiness Daily).

Bradshaw, who said he suffered six serious concussions in which he was “knocked out,” added something less inherently hypothetical: ”There will be a time in the next decade where we will not see football as it is.” He explained that the contact sports will “slowly phase away,” while soccer (which involve plenty of contact between ball and head — causing plenty of concussions, especially for girls), baseball, and basketball will grow.

That said, Bradshaw said he knew what he signed up for, and that he’d “absolutely” do it again.

Bradshaw also suggested that any effort by the league to suddenly express concern for former players is fueled not by compassion but by litigation.

“I have to be careful here because I work for Fox and NFL Network,” Bradshaw said, “but I don’t think they care. They’re forced to care now because it’s politically correct to care. Lawsuits make you care. I think the P.R. makes you care. But personally, when I got out in 1983, do I think they cared about me? No. And you know what? I don’t expect them to. I don’t need them to worry about me. I take care of myself. But, do they care? They’re forced to care right now because, P.R.-wise, it’s not very favorable to them.”

The comments about the future of the game from Bradshaw, one of the top analysts on FOX, bookend words uttered earlier this year by FOX’s Troy Aikman, whose dire prediction about the future of the game seemed unduly pessimistic and flat-out confusing, given that he still makes millions per year via the popularity of the NFL.

Last year, Bradshaw revealed that he suffers from the consequences of concussions, explaining that he routinely re-entered games after having his “bell rung.”

“I’d take smelling salts and go right back out there,” Bradshaw wrote for FOXSports.com. “All of us did that. We didn’t know any better. You don’t know how many times I was in the huddle, asking my teammates to help me call a play.”

To date, neither Bradshaw nor Aikman (who suffered multiple concussions during his NFL career) have joined in the concussion lawsuits against the league. It’s hard not to wonder whether either or both of them eventually will; if their relationships with one of the league’s broadcast partners won’t stop them from saying things that could be problematic from a P.R. standpoint, why not pursue whatever legal rights they may believe they have?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/14/bradshaw-doesnt-think-nfl-truly-cares-about-former-players/

TRH
06-15-2012, 12:05 AM
I don't believe his point that "soccer" will eventually become a big time sport here. There's an extremely, extremely small niche for it (no matter how many grade school kids play...), but thats it. The honest truth is that American's just don't care for Soccer and thats just the way it is.

As for football changing away from a contact sport......i hate to say it.....but i agree with him. I don't think you'll recognize this sport 25 years from now.
I believe in our lifetime, we will see at least the QB, not allowed to be touched/contacted. No question we will see that happen.
And likely, we will see the sport fade to what may be some type of "two-hand-touch" football of some sort or flags, or something. To think otherwise, you are in complete denial. It's coming.
I've even heard talk of no more offensive and defensive lines. Who knows? That kind of stuff...i agree with Terry on....there will be BIG changes to the game, unfortunately.

And don't laugh "hockey". You'll be the next sport impacted with this stuff.

4xSBChamps
06-15-2012, 04:07 AM
we will see the sport fade to what may be some type of "two-hand-touch" football of some sort or flags, or something.

yet, when that day comes, the League & it's TV-partners will still show video clips of a snarling Ray Nitschke clothes-lining a ball-carrier, and Ronnie Lott, launching himself like a missle into a receiver in an attempt to 'sell' the game

And don't laugh "hockey". You'll be the next sport impacted with this stuff.
hockey may have an easier time ridding itself of needless head-injuries, because the object of the game isn't to hit a player hard-enough to drop him to the ground (if the drunken Canucks who run the NHL just enforce existing rules, with stiff penalties)

TRH
06-15-2012, 12:14 PM
yet, when that day comes, the League & it's TV-partners will still show video clips of a snarling Ray Nitschke clothes-lining a ball-carrier, and Ronnie Lott, launching himself like a missle into a receiver in an attempt to 'sell' the game


hockey may have an easier time ridding itself of needless head-injuries, because the object of the game isn't to hit a player hard-enough to drop him to the ground (if the drunken Canucks who run the NHL just enforce existing rules, with stiff penalties)


the die-hards may not like this, but the first thing hockey needs to do is ban fighting.

I've never understood this one.....you can't walk down the street and fight..or do it in the stands...or outside...or at home...or, well, anywhere. It's assault and battery and you'd be arrested in 2 seconds flat. So why is it allowed on the ice??? Mindboggling.
That will be the first thing they'll do....we'll see that happen in the next couple of years.

Atlanta Dan
06-15-2012, 12:58 PM
As for football changing away from a contact sport......i hate to say it.....but i agree with him. I don't think you'll recognize this sport 25 years from now.
I believe in our lifetime, we will see at least the QB, not allowed to be touched/contacted. No question we will see that happen.
And likely, we will see the sport fade to what may be some type of "two-hand-touch" football of some sort or flags, or something. To think otherwise, you are in complete denial. It's coming.
I've even heard talk of no more offensive and defensive lines. Who knows? That kind of stuff...i agree with Terry on....there will be BIG changes to the game, unfortunately.

It is changing even since this thread was started

Pop Warner Weighing Research and Risks in Concussion Prevention Efforts
On Wednesday, in an attempt to limit head injuries to young players, Pop Warner issued new rules that put restrictions on the amount of contact players can have in practice.

Jon Butler, the executive director of Pop Warner, said that research would continue to drive the organization’s rules changes as it tries to limit concussions. Researchers in the field liken Pop Warner — which has more than 285,000 children ages 5 to 15 in its leagues — to pioneers.

“The N.F.L.’s bore the brunt of this in terms of P.R., but how do we know that it’s not the adolescent exposure?” Bailes said. “How do we know it’s not the youth exposure? How do we know it’s not the college exposure?” ....

Butler, Pop Warner’s executive director, estimated that if the country’s largest youth football organization were to outlaw all contact and go to a flag-football approach, about 90 to 95 percent of the players would leave and find tackle football elsewhere.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/15/sports/pop-warner-football-rules-limiting-contact-raise-new-questions.html?ref=sports

I could see pre-high school football becoming a non-tackle equivalent of "tee-ball" baseball, as this pediatric sports medicine specialist suggests

Dr. Matt Grady, a pediatric sports medicine specialist at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said the new rules, while a good start, did not go far enough, and that the emphasis in football for players who have not yet reached high school should be on developing skill and technique, not learning how to tackle.

“Playing tackle football at 10 years old doesn’t translate to being a pro athlete,” he said. “I think the ability to catch and run and throw translates to being a pro athlete. Players should develop these skills, and then we can add in the collisions later.”

Because multiple concussions are more likely to cause permanent declines in cognitive function than one or two, Dr. Grady added, leagues should do more to prevent them at the lowest levels.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/14/sports/pop-warner-football-limits-contact-in-practices.html?ref=sports

Of course the brain of a high school kid is also at risk, so who knows where you draw the line:noidea:

FWIW, if Bradshaw and Aikman think football is such a dangerous sport that the youth of America should stay away from it, maybe they should quit cashing their checks as broadcasters that promote the glory of the NFL games which presumably encourage kids to play the game

4xSBChamps
06-15-2012, 01:58 PM
the die-hards may not like this, but the first thing hockey needs to do is ban fighting.

been a fan for 40+ years, and this is long over-due

:drink:

Bayz101
06-16-2012, 07:27 AM
the die-hards may not like this, but the first thing hockey needs to do is ban fighting.

I've never understood this one.....you can't walk down the street and fight..or do it in the stands...or outside...or at home...or, well, anywhere. It's assault and battery and you'd be arrested in 2 seconds flat. So why is it allowed on the ice??? Mindboggling.
That will be the first thing they'll do....we'll see that happen in the next couple of years.

+1.

Hawaii 5-0
07-13-2012, 02:20 AM
Dawson's Hall call on court detour

July 12, 2012
By Dan Gigler / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

With his induction to the Pro Football Hall of Fame just a few weeks away, former Steelers center Dermontti Dawson is among the latest former NFL players to file suit against the league for head injuries sustained while playing professional football.

According to a suit filed July 3 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Dawson and three other ex-Steelers -- running back Stephen Avery, wide receiver Jeff Graham and safety Jonathan Staggers -- are among 47 former players being represented by attorneys John D. Giddens and Phillip Thomas in Jackson, Miss.

The suit alleges that the league "was aware of the evidence and the risks associated with repetitive traumatic brain injuries and concussions for decades, but deliberately ignored and actively concealed the information from the Plaintiffs and all others who participated in organized football at all levels" and that the repeated injuries can lead to Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy, or CTE.

CTE is a degenerative brain disease associated with a history of concussions and head traumas. Researchers say it can lead to depression, erratic behaviors, memory loss and ultimately early onset dementia.

The suit cites the cases of Steelers Hall of Fame center Mike Webster and guard Terry Long -- both teammates of Dawson -- among several other NFL players who have been disabled or died by their own hand, with CTE as a culprit.

Webster died of heart failure in 2002 at the age of 50, after being mentally disabled from repeated head injuries, the suit said. Long committed suicide in '05 after battling depression which may have been brought on by CTE.

The suit does not specify injuries to Dawson nor any of the other players involved.

More than 2,600 former players and their spouses have filed suit against the NFL to date, including dozens who played all or part of their careers with the Steelers.

Dawson, 47, was a second-round draft pick of the Steelers in 1988 and he played his entire career in Pittsburgh. He started in five games at right guard as a rookie before taking over starting center duties from Webster in '89. At one point he played 170 consecutive games. A seven-time Pro Bowl and six-time first-team All-Pro selection, nagging hamstring injuries ultimately ended his career. He was released after the 2000 season and then retired.

He will be enshrined into the Hall Aug. 4 in Canton, Ohio.

Avery was with the Steelers from 1993-95, the final three seasons of his five-season NFL career.

Graham was a second-round draft for the Steelers in '91 and was with the team through the '93 season.

He played eight more seasons with the Chicago Bears, New York Jets, Philadelphia Eagles and San Diego Chargers.

Staggers was a fifth-round draft pick for the Steelers in '70 and played that season and the '71 season for the team before playing four more seasons with the Green Bay Packers and Detroit Lions.

The plaintiffs' attorneys could not be reached for comment, nor could a spokesperson for the NFL.

In response to previous lawsuits, NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy has said that "the NFL has long made player safety a priority and continues to do so. Any allegation that the NFL intentionally sought to mislead players has no merit.

"It stands in contrast to the league's actions to better protect players and advance the science and medical understanding of the management and treatment of concussions."

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/sports/steelers/dawsons-hall-call-on-court-detour-644493/#ixzz20TcYxUpx

Vis
07-18-2012, 12:23 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/07/18/polamalu-says-he-has-lied-about-concussions-to-keep-playing/


Troy lies to team about concussions and doesn't consider getting his bell rung a concussion. There goes any argument that they players understand the risks. Troy just admitted how ignorant he is of the medicine. If he said he understood that each time was in fact a traumatic brain injury and that he is increasing the likelihood of permanent lifetime deficits when he lies to go back on the field, I would say he gets it and is hurting himself by choice, howerver stupidly. But he thinks it's no big deal and there he is simply wrong on the medical facts.

The rookie symposium and all league meeting should teach the truth about brain injuries.

Atlanta Dan
08-31-2012, 02:56 PM
The CBA argument isn't a factual defense. If the Motion is correct on the 12(b)(6) grounds of simply failing to allege required elements in an Amended Complaint, that's the attorney's failure and doesn't speak to the merits. I' d be more interested in a SJ motion with attachments if you see one.

FYI is a link to the motion to dismiss the concussion lawsuits on the ground the claims for relief are preempted under the terms of the CBAs between the players and the league, together with a link to the amended master complaint

http://nflconcussionlitigation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Master_Administrative_Long_Form_Complaint.pdf

http://nflconcussionlitigation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/download-123.pdf