Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/278110926/Tom-Brady
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 06:51:32+00:00

Document:
On July 28,2015, the National Football League Management Council ("Management Council"
Minnesota matter was immediately transferred to this district, under docket number 15 Civ.
Football League Players Association v. National Football League Management Council, Civ. No.
15-3168 (RHKIHB), slip op. at 2 (D. Minn. July 30, 2015).
("Brady") imposing a four-game suspension on Brady ("Vincent's Disciplinary Decision Letter"
or "Vincent's Letter to Brady"); (d) the letter, dated May 11, 2015, from Vincent to Robert K.
on August 12,2015 and on August 19,2015.
NFL Executive Vice President and General Counsel JeffPash. Wells Report at I.
and responsible individual(s) to appropriate discipline.
Competitive Integrity Policy at A2-A3; see also Report at 22.
psi and placed back in play. 3 Wells Report at 63-70.
including but not limited to, a fine of $25,000.
Game Operations Manual at A39-A40.
game balls were re-inflated- improved compared to his performance in the first half.
in the second half, he completed 12 of 14 passes for 131 yards and two touchdowns.").
separately commissioned analysis prepared by the consulting firm "Exponent."
would deflate game balls without Brady's knowledge and approval." !d. at 19.
public. See discussion infra pp. 32-33.
communication related to those efforts." !d. at 16-17.
the pre-game inspection by the game officials." !d. at 129.
evidence to support any finding of wrongdoing with respect to the kicking ball." !d. at 132.
official checked it? No, there is not such direct evidence." Aug. 12,2015 Hr'g Tr. 22:3-9.
which date back three to eight months prior to the AFC Championship Game.
On May II, 2015, Vincent wrote a disciplinary decision letter to Patriots owner Robert K.
ball inflation needle. Wells Report at 9-12.
See Vincent Letter to Robert K. Kraft, discussed infra pp. 7-9.
Mr. Wells and his colleagues." Id. (emphasis added).
principle that the club is responsible for the actions of club employees." Id. at 3.
with preparation, supervision, or handling of footballs or any other equipment on game day." Id.
developed to promote fairness in the game." Vincent Letter to Brady at I; see also Award at I.
The Vincent Letter to Brady referred directly to the Wells Report and its "general awareness"
testimony that the [R]eport concludes was not plausible and contradicted by other evidence." !d.
detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in the game of professional football." 8 !d.
without pay for your club's first four games of the 2015 regular season." 9 Id. at 2.
suspend Player for a period certain or indefinitely; and/or to terminate this contract.
(Dallas Cowboys). See SCHEDULE & STATS, http://www.patriots.com/schedule-and-stats.
competence and credibility ofNFL staff."
and former NFL Commissioner Paul J. Tagliabue.
exercise that discretion to hear Mr. Brady's appea1." 12 Id., Ex. 160 at I.
memorializing any witness interviews)." Id., Ex. 159, at 2.
necessary or even an appropriate witness, much less a 'central witness' as the NFLPA contends .
conduct or the discipline imposed." !d., Ex. 160 (emphasis added).
pads, eyewear, and cleats/turf shoes), regardless of whether discipline was ultimately assessed."
whether or not discipline was ultimately assessed."
!4J." 13 !d., Ex. 166 at 4.
At the time of the document request, the Players Association may have been unaware that Mr.
Hr'g Tr. 268:17-25); see also discussion infra pp. 32-33.
Weiss investigation began." Id. (emphasis added).
access by Mr. Wells to witnesses and documents." !d. at 2.
and Dr. Duane Steffey, Director of the Statistical and Data Sciences Group at Exponent.
examination(s) of Dr. Caligiuri, Dr. Steffey, and Dr. Marlow, on behalf of the NFL.
[Competitive Integrity Policy] ... And by the way, the fine is $5,512 for the first offense.
June 23,2015 Hr'g Tr. 25:12-24, 26:16-22.
text messages, and other communications discussed in both the Wells Report and at the hearing,"
!d. at 15 (emphasis in original).
"the conduct at issue here- specifically the willful destruction of potentially relevant evidencegoes well beyond Mr. Brady's failure to respond to or fully cooperate with the investigation."
Award at l, 5, 7-9, 17 (emphasis added).
by which, with Mr. Jastremski's support, Mr. McNally tampered with the game balls." Id.
at I 0 (emphasis added). This finding by Goodell goes far beyond the "general awareness"
finding in the Wells Report or in Vincent's May II, 2015 Disciplinary Decision Letter to Brady.
Compare Award at I 0 with Report at 2 and Vincent Letter to Brady at I.
not produced upon reasonable request, or when individuals do not provide truthful information."
player's contract." Id. at 17.
drugs [four-game suspension) .." Id. at 16 (emphasis added).
game of professional football," stated Goodell. Id. (emphasis added).
without the requisites of fairness or due process." Kaplan v. Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc., No.
96 Civ. 259 (JFK), 1996 WL 640901, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 4, 1996).
be enforced unless one of those grounds is affirmatively shown to exist." Wall Street Assocs.
also vacate an arbitral award "where there was evident partiality ... " 9 U.S.C. I O(a)(2).
(Apr. 9, 1994). In NFLMC v. NFLPA (Ricky Brown) ("Ricky Brown"), Arbitrator Michael H.
"adequate notice is the fundamental concept in discipline cases." Slip op. at 10 (July 16, 2010).
suspensions based purely on obstructing a League investigation." !d. at 13.
Power Com., 143 F .3d 704, 726 (2d Cir. 1998).
and which is attributable to failure to cooperate?"
that a four-game suspension was the appropriate sanction."
Aug. 19,2015 Hr'g Tr. 59:17-25.
agent) to cover up the underlying violation.
incorporated into the 2014 Player Policies, which sets forth in great detail "testing procedures,"
Goodell added: "I do not rely on those examples to determine the discipline imposed on Mr.
violations of the steroid policy." ld. (emphasis added).
Steroids and Related Substances at 5-16.
steroids and a masking agent.
Aug. 19,2015 Hr'g Tr. 63:15-25.
factors is (remotely) present here.
94 (2d Cir. 1988) (quoting Ethyl Corn. v. United Steelworkers, 768 F.2d 180, 184-85 (7th Cir.
impediment rather than an instrument of change.").
June 23,2015 Hr'g Tr. 336:19-23.
failure to cooperate with- or even allegedly obstructing- an NFL investigation." Def.'s Mem.
purely on obstructing a League investigation.
Def.'s Countercl. ~ 129; id., Ex. 113, Bounty-Gate, slip op. at 13 (emphasis in original).
Steelworkers of Am. v. Enter. Wheel & Car Com., 80S. Ct. 1358, 1361 (1960).
it says: at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities ofMr.
that in the bathroom, if in fact it happened, McNally deflated the balls?
Did he know that McNally then went on to the field with the balls?
obstructed' the subsequent investigation." 17 !d. at 8 (quoting Award at I 3, 17-18).
were involved in deflating the footballs.
least generally aware of the inappropriate activities.
Generally aware is knew, I believe, your Honor.
Aug. 12,2015 Hr'g Tr. 24:12-25:17 (emphasis in original).
Letter to Brady with Award at 13.
both the Patriots and Mr. Brady." Award at 2.
they may be disciplined (much less suspended) for general awareness of misconduct by others.
consequences of violations, in order to be enforceable .... ").
Investigation, Brady similarly had no notice of a four-game suspension. See discussion supra pp.
No Notice of Suspension as Opposed to Fine: Competitive Integrity Policy vs.
advantage." Def.'s Countercl. 'If I 06. With respect to "Other Uniform/Equipment Violations,"
Player Policies at 15 (emphasis in original).
violations" results in a fine of$5,512. ld. at 20.
Competitive Rules," which is incorporated into Section A2 of the Game Operations Manual.
Wells Report at I. See discussion supra pp. 3-4.
reading the Wells report? That's what I wanted to establish.
'equipment violations' only put Brady on notice of a potential fine." Pl.'s Mem. Supp. 5.
detrimental." !d. (quoting Award at 18) (emphasis added).
deprivation of life, liberty or property by adjudication be preceded by notice ...." Texaco, Inc.
June 23,2015 Hr'g Tr. 244:19-22.
the Competitive Integrity Policy that Wells cited in his report?
A [Vincent]: Game-Day Operations Manual.
manual is not given out to players; is that correct, to your knowledge?
!d. at 250:13-251:1 (emphasis added).
v. Short, 102 S. Ct. 781, 795 (1982)(quoting Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 70S.
Ct. 652, 656 (1950)); see also Lankford v. Idaho, Ill S. Ct. 1723, 1729 (1991 ).
Brady was on notice that equipment violations under the Player Policies could result in fines.
Coaches," and not to players. 20 Game Operations Manual at A2.
Integrity Policy, that Policy could not serve as the basis for disciplinary action against him.
Petersion)) ("Adrian Peterson") each held that the increased NFL penalties set forth in a "new"
WL 795253, at *5 n.4.
to cooperate in the subsequent investigation." See discussion supra pp. 7-9.
'general awareness' standard." Def.'s Countercl. 'If 117 (emphasis in original).
Competitive Policy's application to Clubs [and Club personnel], not players." Def.'s Countercl.
Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc., 761 F.3d 303,313 (2d Cir. 2014) cert. denied sub nom. Giddens v.
between these provisions, the specific governs the general."); John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. v.
Kolel Beth Yechiel Mechil ofTartikov, Inc. v. YLL Irrevocable Trust, 729 F.3d 99, 107 (2d Cir.
observed by the federal courts." Tempo Shain Com. v. Bertek, Inc., 120 F.3d 16,20 (2d Cir.
1997) (quoting Bell Aerospace Co. Div. of Textron v. Local516, 500 F.2d 921,923 (2d Cir.
must "indicate in what respects testimony would be cumulative.") (emphasis added).
the content of that meeting to the individuals the NFL is willing to produce would prevent Mr.
of a meeting that both parties have identified as critical." Id.
Goodell as to the ways Pash's testimony would have been "cumulative."
Do you know what the contents were of [Mr. Pash's] comments?
June 23, 2015 Hr' g Tr. 269:4-13.
evidence and determine what materials may be cumulative or irrelevant." Abu Dhabi Inv. Auth.
aft'd. 557 F. App'x 66 (2d Cir. 2014) cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 137, 190 L. Ed. 2d 45 (2014).
pertinent and material to the controversy," Tempo Shain, 120 F.3d at 19 (quoting 9 U.S.C.
"compiled in the investigators' interviews").
investigative information which was not available to Brady.
Postlewaite v. McGraw-Hill. Inc., No. 98 Civ. 0611 (LLS), 1998 WL 751687, at *4 (S.D.N.Y.
Oct. 28, 1998) affd sub nom. Postlewaite v. McGraw Hill. Inc., 10 F. App'x 16 (2d Cir. 2001).
Did you consider the NFL to be your client for purposes of the attorneyclient privilege -Yeah.
-- with respect to the preparation of this investigative report?
June 23,2015 Hr'g Tr. 267:15-20.
would be additional [to the Investigation] bills, right?
during the arbitral proceedings; and, at the same time, withhold them from Brady.
Now, Mr. Reisner, you observed, was representing the NFL and crossexamining Mr. Brady and Mr. Snyder in this proceeding; is that correct?
That is -- I saw it. You saw it.
you on this independent investigation, right?
If you read the report, it basically says that.
discipline players for conduct detrimental to the NFL." Def.'s Countercl. '1[165.
Peterson, 2015 WL 795253, at *6).
immediately. The Clerk is respectfully requested to close cases 15 Civ. 5916 and 15 Civ. 5982.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 

v. 
 v. 
 v. 
in fine
 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.