TheOak

Devils Advocate:

It is a little more gray that that.... While "yes" Vilma's lawsuit is against Goodell personally, Goodell made statements to the public on behalf of the NFL, acting as the Commissioner of the NFL, and as a NFL representative..

Read Page 2 (8 of 32)/16 (22 of 32)...fk it! read the entire thing... There is so much precedent against Vilma that this will probably be thrown out.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/footb...defamation.pdf

“The law is completely clear that employees may not resort to state tort … claims in substitution
for their rights under the grievance procedure in a collective bargaining agreement.”

6 Indeed, in Article 3, Section 2 of the CBA (quoted above on page 5), the parties agreed to bar
player lawsuits against the NFL or any club raising any claim relating to the CBA or the NFL
Constitution and Bylaws. That Mr. Vilma here sued the Commissioner, rather than “the NFL or
any Club,” is irrelevant to the no-suit bar given that the Commissioner was acting as the Chief
Executive Officer of the NFL in connection with the challenged statements. In any event, if there
were a question about that point, its resolution would also require interpretation of the CBA,
thereby creating another ground for preemption, as noted above. Furthermore, there is no question
that this dispute involves interpretation of various provisions of the CBA and Constitution
and Bylaws, and hence it falls within the scope of, and should be resolved by, the CBA’s dispute
resolution procedures, not a lawsuit.