NFL Class Counsel Alleges Link Between Roger Stone and Rival Attorney
From the Watergate scandal to the investigation of Russian influence on the 2016 election, longtime political insider and self-described "dirty trickster" Roger Stone has been linked to a long list of highly contentious disputes that have had ramifications across the country. Now, the NFL concussion class action settlement can be added to that list.
February 08, 2019 at 05:45 PM
4 minute read
From the Watergate scandal to the investigation of Russian influence on the 2016 election, longtime political insider and self-described “dirty trickster” Roger Stone has been linked to a long list of highly contentious disputes that have had ramifications across the country. Now, the NFL concussion class action settlement can be added to that list.
Earlier this week, a lead attorney representing the class of retired National Football League players entered a filing that alleges there is a link between Stone and a south Florida attorney, who represents nearly 90 ex-players and has been a vocal critical of the class action's leadership.
Seeger Weiss attorney Chris Seeger, who is co-lead class counsel in the litigation, entered a filing Tuesday saying that North Palm Beach attorney Patrick Tighe of X1Law has been working with Stone to “ sow the 'media' with misinformation,” and spread “conspiracy theories and falsehoods about the settlement.”
Speaking Friday, Tighe said he has no relationship with Stone, and that he was “puzzled” by the filing.
“I have nothing to do with Roger Stone,” he said. “My real question is why doesn't Mr. Seeger have urgency for these class members to get paid.”
Seeger's filing stems from an order that U.S. District Judge Anita Brody of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, who is overseeing the implementation of the concussion settlement, issued last month. That order directed the settlement claims administrator to clarify the rules about what standards certain doctors should use when determining whether a former player sustained an injury qualifying them to receive settlement funds. Brody indicated in the order that the court would then need to review and approve the clarification.
Brody issued the order after the NFL dropped its appeal of seven cases that raised issues about the standards for qualifying the ex-players if the diagnosing doctor deviated from certain diagnostic criteria.
After Brody entered the order, Tighe, who has clashed with Seeger on a number of issues that have arisen in the litigation, filed a motion asking the judge to reconsider, contending that her ruling went beyond the issues the NFL raised on appeal, and that the players should be able to have input if the clarification changes the rules. On Friday, Tighe said he also the challenge to preserve any issues his clients may want to appeal.
Seeger's filing from Wednesday, however, opposed Tighe's motion, and said none of Tighe's cases involve the issues that were on appeal and that the court's order made no changes to the standards.
The six-page filing went on to say that Tighe has been an “active collaborator with various interest sites and 'media' sources” to spread conspiracies about the settlement.
Specifically, the filing claims Tighe is a “go-to source” for Stone, and the blog “Advocacy for Fairness in Sports,” both of which have been highly critical of the settlement. The filing also said Tighe was a guest on a broadcast of Infowars, which is a far-right wing commentary website and media outlet led by the conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. In the segment, Tighe contended that the NFL orchestrated a “dysfunctional” settlement program and used the controversy about players kneeling during the national anthem to distract the public, the filing said.
“Moreover, since the order challenged by Mr. Tighe was entered, on January 17, 2019, Mr. Stone has echoed the position asserted by Mr. Tighe,” Seeger said in the filing.
The NFL also entered a filing Tuesday that opposed Tighe's reconsideration motion, saying Brody's order requesting clarification had “no effect whatsoever on the meaning of that standard.”
READ THE FILING
|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 AllSpecial Section: Products Liability, Mass Torts & Class Action/Personal Injury
2 minute readPa. Firms Set to Finish Year Strong, Thanks to Demand Uptick, Shorter Collections Cycle
4 minute readImmunity for Mental Health Care and Coverage for CBD: What's on the Pa. High Court's November Calendar
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Largest Law Firms: Locations, Starting Salary and Clients By Firm
- 2Largest Law Firms: Firm Leadership and Practice Areas
- 3Largest Law Firms: New Jersey and Firmwide Attorney Count
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Marc Mandel, Senior Vice President & General Counsel at EXOS
- 5Florida Seeks to Short-Circuit Tech Fight
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