In the wake of NFL senior vice president of health and safety Jeff Miller's recent admission to Congress that there is a link between chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) and playing football, litigators on both sides of the NFL's pending federal class action concussion lawsuit settlement are trying to unpack what it means for the deal, which is currently before a three-judge appellate panel. Unsurprisingly, the lawyers that have agreed to the settlement don't think Miller's admission changes anything; the lawyers objecting to deal think it changes quite a bit.Why does class counsel's letter objecting to use of Miller CTE admission in CA3 appeal use NFL law firm's footer? pic.twitter.com/736YHSgJ0n
— Daniel Wallach (@WALLACHLEGAL) March 19, 2016
Advertisement
Advertisement
@candacebc81 @WALLACHLEGAL Does it violate the rules since the response was capped at 350 words? NFL seems have gotten 700 w/ Seeger incl.
— NFLCSFacts (@NFLObjectors) March 19, 2016
The reason this is even remotely curious is because the settlement severely limits (or entirely eliminates) compensation for CTE symptoms and posthumous diagnosis of the disease. Many players who develop CTE will be out of luck, and the NFL figures to save a lot of money. That's obviously good for the league and not so good for the players Seeger represents, so it's striking to see the two adversaries agreeing. Add in the footer issue, and a seemingly cozy relationship looks even cozier.Keep in mind: Even if the relationship between Seeger and the NFL is arm's length, he still has an interest in disputing the relevance of Miller's comments. Because this is how settlements work. Seeger and the league agreed on a deal, the majority of retired NFL players didn't object (or didn't bother to), and a federal judge gave the settlement her stamp of approval. Now, Seeger wants to get paid, a reward that likely will be tens of millions of dollars. Not only does he want to get paid, but he has a duty to get his clients who are covered by the settlement paid, too. And that's understandable: When you reach an agreement in a multimillion-dollar case, the last thing you want to do is re-open the process or let other aggrieved parties screw it up for you.Attorneys have two basic considerations in these situations: what are we willing to settle for and call it a win? And what gives me the best shot of achieving that? It is infinitely easier to win an argument by saying "my position is correct because of [specific fact]," than it is to say "my position is correct because, while we are still researching it, most of the science tends to show that there is likely a link between [x] and [y]." Maybe Seeger was all too willing to work with the NFL and gave up on CTE too early, in the process selling out a host of players to get what he wanted. Or maybe he just thought it was a loser for his ultimate goal, which is to get at least some of his clients paid. Chances are, it's a little of both.$112MM in attorneys' fees, sadly at your service. https://t.co/wccS3Z0b7Q
— Paul D. Anderson (@PaulD_Anderson) March 19, 2016