Seven former N.F.L. players accused the N.F.L. and the lawyers representing more than 4,500 retirees of failing to justify how they reached their proposed settlement that includes an uncapped amount of damages for players with severe neurological disorders.
In a 58-page objection filed in federal court Wednesday, the seven former players, including Alan Faneca and Robert Royal, said the proposed settlement announced last week would fail to compensate many retired football players, including those showing signs of chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or C.T.E., a degenerative neurological condition.
Faneca, Royal and the other objectors said that players who were injured in the now-defunct N.F.L. Europe would not be covered by the settlement, and because the plaintiffs’ lawyers conducted no discovery, there is no record to determine if they struck a fair deal with the N.F.L.
The former players also accused the lead plaintiffs’ lawyers, who have asked for $112 million in fees, of failing to demonstrate how they reached the agreement with the N.F.L. and of being biased in favor of reaching a deal.
“The Revised Settlement is a great deal — for the N.F.L. and Class Counsel,” the filing said. “It is a lousy deal for the retired players, whose rights have been bargained away without adequate or independent representation.”
The N.F.L. and lawyers for the plaintiffs declined to comment on the objection.
If Judge Anita B. Brody of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania approves the preliminary settlement, every retired player or his beneficiary will receive a packet that describes the terms of the deal and gives him a chance to object to the agreement or opt out of it.
In January, Brody objected to the first proposed deal because she said she doubted whether $765 million would cover all claims over the 65-year life of the settlement. The N.F.L.'s new, open-ended commitment is expected to be enough to persuade Brody to allow the settlement to be sent to the players.
Brody could rule on the objections to the settlement at a fairness hearing after the players have had a chance to respond, or she could dismiss some or all of the complaints. If the objectors are unsatisfied with her response, they could appeal the settlement. No cash awards would be paid until all appeals are exhausted.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/04/sports/football/former-players-file-objection-to-proposed-nfl-settlement.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage®ion=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine&utm_source=RSS+Feeds%3A+Aggregate+News+%26+Info&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TBI_News_Information+%28TBI+News+and+Info+-+BrainLine.org%29&_r=0
0 comments:
Post a Comment