NFL Concussion Case Judge Denies Bid to Add New Lead Counsel Post
A federal judge has rejected calls to appoint additional counsel to represent injured players seeking recovery under the NFL's $1 billion concussion settlement.
April 19, 2018 at 04:56 PM
3 minute read
Photo: Shutterstock
A federal judge has rejected calls to appoint additional counsel to represent injured players seeking recovery under the NFL's $1 billion concussion settlement.
Over the past month, more than 20 firms filed motions joining a request to have additional counsel appointed to oversee the settlement implementation process. The calls, led in large part by Locks Law Firm, came after several firms expressed frustration at the claims process, and at Seeger Weiss attorney Chris Seeger, who, in his role as co-lead class counsel in the litigation, is charged with overseeing the implementation of the settlement on behalf of the broad class of retired National Football League players.
U.S. District Judge Anita Brody of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, however, denied those requests Wednesday, saying she based her decision on, among other things, “the fine job Seeger Weiss has done” and Locks Law's “role in facilitating third-party funding agreements to class members prohibited under the settlement agreement.”
“This undermines any claim by the Locks firm that it would be able to faithfully administer the agreement,” Brody said.
In late March, Gene Locks filed a motion saying the $1 billion settlement, which is expected to compensate 20,000 former NFL players who are suffering from neurological injuries, is “in danger of failing in its execution.” The motion further called for the appointment of administrative class counsel, which would provide a “structural protection against the NFL's approach” and have “all the rights and duties of co-lead counsel Seeger Weiss.”
“The Seeger Weiss go-it-alone strategy has not worked,” Locks, who said his firm represents 1,100 registered ex-players, said. ”Seeger Weiss cannot satisfy these duties alone. It does not have the resources, the expertise, or the day-to-day incentives to engage in aggressive advocacy on behalf of players.”
The motion was joined by 21 other firms, including co-lead class counsel Anapol Weiss, although not all firms agreed that Locks Law should fill the proposed administrative counsel position.
Seeger responded last week, saying the claims process has been a success and that all of the issues raised by Locks had previously been addressed. He added that Locks was not suited for the proposed new leadership post, saying not only had he been removed as a settlement trustee in another case in 1989, but he also signed off on at least 28 funding agreements involving 16 of its clients.
“Many of the Locks' motion's complaints stem from the fact that, although he signed it, Locks has repeatedly ignored (or manifested an ignorance of) the settlement agreement,” Seeger said in his response.
The third-party funding agreements have been a contentious element in the settlement implementation.
Since the settlement agreement was approved, several litigation funders have entered into funding agreements with retired football players who are in the process of seeking money from the class action settlement. However, in December, Brody invalidated those agreements, and determined that the settlement language specifically forbids lenders from entering into loan agreements that require ex-players to assign over their monetary claims.
The funders are seeking to appeal.
Seeger said in an emailed statement that he was pleased with Brody's order denying claims to appoint a settlement administrator.
“Our focus remains on holding the NFL accountable and making sure former players and their families receive every benefit they are entitled to under this agreement,” he said.
Locks did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPhila. Med Mal Lawyers In for Busy Year as Court Adjusts for Filing Boom
3 minute read'Recover, Reflect, Retool and Retry': Lessons From Women Atop Pa. Legal Community
3 minute readEDPA's New Chief Judge Plans to Advance Efforts to Combat Threats to Judiciary
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250