1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!
    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers.
    We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

(OT) Jets fan sues the Patriots.

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by LV Bolt Fan, Sep 28, 2007.

  1. LV Bolt Fan

    LV Bolt Fan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,310
    Ratings:
    +432
    I kept looking for Mike Aguirre's name. :icon_rofl:


    Jets Ticket Holder Sues Patriots and Coach Belichick, Seeks Damages of More Than $184 Million
    09-28-2007 3:17 PM
    By DENNIS WASZAK Jr., AP Sports Writer

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Patriots spokesman Stacey James declined to comment on the lawsuit.

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

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

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

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

    Now, they're taking on the Patriots.

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

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

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

    ___

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

    Boltdiehard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,817
    Ratings:
    +1,171
  3. !~BOLT~!

    !~BOLT~! Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,597
    Ratings:
    +205
    Sue Goodell too, he burned the evidence.
     
  4. sdbound

    sdbound New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    6,417
    Ratings:
    +942
    This gives me a warm and fuzzy
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    I don't know how the lawyers around here will perceive this action, but I fully support it. I hope they get to trial. Sure would be nice to see full disclosure on what the Pats actually did.
     
  6. Charger Dave

    Charger Dave Dead account

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,817
    Ratings:
    +1,028
    Looks to me like disillusioned Pats fans could join that class action suit? Or do we wait for them to file their own?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. BoltsFanUK

    BoltsFanUK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,111
    Ratings:
    +848
    it would be nice wouldn't it:yes:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. PowderLove

    PowderLove Former Mod, Current Slacker

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,910
    Ratings:
    +494
    Who here is a lawyer? I want to sue them over last year's playoff game.
     
  9. BoltsFanUK

    BoltsFanUK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,111
    Ratings:
    +848
    Anteater is a lawyer..i think:icon_tease:
     
  10. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    Ant is just a wanna be lawyer. He hasn't got his shingle hung yet.

    There is one lawyer here that I can think of .... and three I know at Chargers.com.
     
  11. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    Florio's newest take on the Pats cheating video lawsuit -

    LAWSUIT PREVENTS PATS FROM MOVING ON

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share This Page