JonVilma51: The nfl sent me a letter "demanding" I drop my defamation suit or else...lol or else wat?!?? They no likey me lawsuitey
 

I just saw this on my facebook too. Vilma doesn't give a f***!


Jonathan Vilma
The nfl sent me a letter "demanding" I drop my defamation suit or else...lol or else wat?!?? They no likey me lawsuitey (From jonvilma51 channel on MogoTXT )

This one's a head scratcher to me. I don't know what to make of the letter, or especially Vilma's out and out vigilance??

Pics or it didn't happen.

Vilma has nothing to lose. He's fighting the good fight. Rock on Jon!

Go for his throat Jon

Hit them hard Johnny, and in the walet.

Impossible to know how this will shake out in the short-or long-run.

Alaska

League files grievance against Vilma for pursuing defamation case | ProFootballTalk
Things have quieted down a bit in connection with the Saints bounty scandal, but the present calm comes merely from a minor break in the line of storms.

Eventually, the lawsuits filed recently in Louisiana will heat up, with inevitable efforts to block the suspensions pending the outcome of the courtroom challenges to Commissioner Roger Goodell’s exercise of power over the players. As to the defamation claim filed by Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma against Goodell, however, the NFL has thrown down the proverbial gloves.

Vilma has disclosed on Twitter that the league has asked him, perhaps not politely, to abandon the case.

Jonathan Vilma
✔
@JonVilma51
The nfl sent me a letter "demanding" I drop my defamation suit or else...lol or else wat?!?? They no likey me lawsuitey
11 Jul 12 ReplyRetweetFavorite
Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the more accurate description is that the NFL has filed a grievance under the CBA against the NFLPA and Vilma seeking an order forcing Vilma to dismiss his defamation suit. On Wednesday, lawyer Peter Ginsberg informed the league that Vilma will not be withdrawing the defamation suit, arguing that the grievance filed by the league has no merit.

The letter, a copy of which PFT has obtained, contends that the grievance procedure contained in the Collective Bargaining Agreement doesn’t apply in this case, because Vilma filed his suit not “against the NFL or any Club” but against Goodell, and because the defamation claim arises not from the suspension imposed by Goodell on Vilma but from the allegedly false public statements made by Goodell before imposing discipline.

The grievance “constitutes an improper effort to interfere with a pending judicial matter,” Ginsberg writes in his letter to Dennis Curran, NFL Sr. Vice President of Labor Litigation & Policy. “If you pursue the Grievance, we will consider seeking sanctions against the NFL [Management Council] before Honorable Helen G. Berrigan . . . based on NFLMC’s improper attempt to obstruct a pending judicial action in which it is not a party.”

So, yes, as Vilma surmises, the NFL “no likey [his] lawsuitey.” And Vilma’s lawyer doesn’t like how the NFL is voicing its displeasure.

And the end result is that the ever-twisting-and-turning bounty case has developed yet another twist and/or turn.

The NFL's grievance needs to be tossed and resubmitted by Roger. This is a personal suit and should be treated as such. And why even send the man a letter. He does not care! If he did he wouldn't have filed it in the first place or blow up Twitter every week.

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.

I still fail to understand the intent of the letter. Filing the grievance was all that was required. No point in applying pressure if they feel 100% confident in the CBA article.

The NFL didn't task him to slander Vilma so therefore he's not representing them at that point. I think there could be a small window of wiggle room.

Goodell IS the NFL... He was tasked with protecting the league by the owners... And if you read the linked grievance you will see where it says that basically Tom Benson turned everything over to the league.

Something that has not been brought up because it does not exist is what Benson has to say about "how things are being handled". Does anyone think that Jerry Jones, Robert Craft, Dan Rooney would be quiet about the way things are being handled? The league is basically slaughtering the image of the Saints and its players... While Benson sits at home and watches it happen.

Pay Careful attention to the words accented.
Slander can be a difficult word to define, its very subjective... For Goodell to openly state items that he feels were detrimental to the NFL is not slander or defamation of character. Goodell has just stated what he believes is evidence justifying the penalties...

Had Goodell come out and said that Vilma was an animal, dumbazz, criminal, teabagger... then that would be defamation of character and slander.


Think about this.... If you read the arrest report in a news paper it says what those people were arrested for,, they have not been tried or found guilty, its just stating the charges against them. If the arrest report in the paper called someone a "bad mother" or a "wh0re" then that is defamation of character and slander. But no... It just says arrested for "solicitation of prostitution".

I am a fan of Jon Vilma and support him 100% Most of his tweets are ok but but this one just doesnt seem like a good idea to me. I'm surprised his lawyer doesn't advise him against it.

I am surprised all of the players lawyers and representatives do not advise against twitter...

From walking out on the kommisar to this, Vilma doesn't seem to be getting or be following good advice on how to play the legal game.

On another take on this, how many other participants in this drama have received such letters and did what rg demanded?

Well.. Vilma is the only one suing Roger outright.

Good point on advice... But what would you expect? His advice from the NFLPA is coming from the same people who gave Goodell all of his power... Not exactly a fount of well thought out strategy.

I just feel there was no point in sending a letter, period. It's petty. The NFL claims they are 100% right so why even waste your time addressing Vilma unless they think there is a slight chance the situation could get out of control. Hey bow down right now and your re-instatement could possibly go smoother is what it sounds like.

Vilma is just awesome on twitter... it was funny when the first allegations came out on the Bountygate and the hints that Vilma might be a player facing suspension, he tweeted something like "I think I'll wear my jersey in public today" or something to that nature.

:bng:

Vilma is pursuing his rightful legal recourse. The Kommisar didn't just say that they were investigating allegatiuons against him. Godhell said he was trying to injure people without any proof. To me that is defamation of character.

The CBA and its dispute resolution program "legally" prevents him from doing so. When he signed that CBA he legally gave that option up... As far as for trying to hurt someone... well that's arguable because they all do hit with the intention of destroying. Its the barbaric nature of football..


@Beastmode - Those types of letters are normal for law firms to send out, yes they serve no real purpose but to make the other party think and retract their suit. The intent is to forego the expenses of litigation and depositions.. This has already gotten very expensive for both parties.

To counter the Devil's Advocate

Goodell publicly made comments indicating Vilma paid $ 10,000 for the hit on Farve before the NFL concluded it's investigation. This is a large part of Vilma's case and truthfully where he stands the best chance. Think of it this way (though, I'll admit not exactly the same circumstance, but good analogy) if you are standing trial for murder and during the case the I as judge publicly say you stabbed the the victim then I have purger-ed the case and am open to civil litigation as at said time you were not convicted.

As for hiding behind the NFL. If Goodell wants to use "I'm the voice of the league" Then his comments need always begin with "we as the league", "we as the NFL", "the NFL believes", etc. This is done effectively by Gary Bettman (NHL) and preplantation owner David Stern (NBA). Is it nitpicking, possibly. Howefver, if you want to say you are protected by representing league and not as Roger Goodell then you need to start doing it.

... good thing the CBA is not the U.S. Constitution.

OJ was accused... No defamation recourse.
Presidents are accused all the time.. No defamation recourse.

Just saying so dont throw fruit at me:

Goodell has been accused of lying... No defamation recourse.

Goodell has in fact lied. That's why there is no defamation recourse.

Goodell going out, on his own, in press releases HE ordered and making publicly false statements about Vilma is BEYOND the purview of the CBA.

Goodell used his authority as commissioner to do this, and the YES MEN around him just ran along with it ever-fearing the wrath of Roger.

Much of this is mono-y-mono, Vilma vs. Goodell. Goodell trying everything in his power to include the NFL is a sign of fear and weakness.

not throwing fruit, making counter argument



mmmmmmmmmmmmmm fruit.....

which is why I think they should use a system made popular in the 1980s. I am of course talking about the Thunderdome. "Two men enter, one man leaves." Fair enough.

Ok ... pro comment....

Suspected witch... Burn him.

Had to like your post because of that... :)
Like it is written, you can translate it as either "monkey and monkey", or "*****cat and *****cat", without the felines :)