Skip to content

Thirteen days later, still no ruling on motion for stay

MootFestival-01

On April 29, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit decided to grant a temporary stay of Judge Nelson’s ruling lifting the lockout, in order to give the Eighth Circuit time to rule on the motion for a full stay of Judge Nelson’s ruling lifting the lockout pending the review of Judge Nelson’s ruling lifting the lockout.

That was 13 days ago.  Since then, the Eighth Circuit has agreed to expedite the entire appeal process.  But the Eighth Circuit definitely hasn’t expedited the consideration of the motion for a stay.

Adam Schefter of ESPN reports that court clerk Michael Gans said he does not expect a ruling today.  And it’s gotten to the point where the court didn’t even attempt to offer an excuse.

Last week, Gans hinted that the Eighth Circuit may not even rule on the motion.  With the hearing on the appeal only 22 days away, it appears that Gans wasn’t simply speculating.

Speaking of speculation, the theory making the rounds in league circles last week focused on the potential status of Judge Colloton as a swing vote, given that he previously has ruled against the NFL in past cases arising under the expired labor deal.  As the theory goes, Judge Colloton may not want to tip his hand regarding the ultimate outcome of the case.

Meanwhile, the Eighth Circuit either thinks the players aren’t suffering truly irreparable harm during the lockout, or that the NFL would suffer truly irreparable harm if the lockout is lifted.  Or that it all can wait until June 3 for the hearing and some point thereafter for a decision.

Permalink 39 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Union
39 Responses to “Thirteen days later, still no ruling on motion for stay”
  1. ballen7 says: May 12, 2011 5:28 PM

    obviously a way of ruling without ruling because they can’t rule the way they would prefer.

  2. tmac48 says: May 12, 2011 5:32 PM

    So, what was the point of Judge Nelson’s ruling then…?

  3. carson9 says: May 12, 2011 5:33 PM

    They can take all the time they want. Pre season football blows anyway. Ever been to pre season training camp? Pay $35 to park and $8 per beer just to watch your favorite player stretch and jog for an hour. WTF, keep them locked out all summer for all i care.

  4. champgiff says: May 12, 2011 5:37 PM

    This mess has turned into a full-blown pissing match between the NFL and it’s players…and left us fans standing down-wind of the battle.

    Let me know when football starts.

  5. Todd Jones says: May 12, 2011 5:37 PM

    Dear God. Just get it over with you greedy, greedy people. Fans are getting screwed while you fight over petty issues.

  6. whatswiththehate says: May 12, 2011 5:38 PM

    “Meanwhile, the Eighth Circuit either thinks the players aren’t suffering truly irreparable harm during the lockout, or that the NFL would suffer truly irreparable harm if the lockout is lifted.”

    Mike, you must be tired cause this quote sounds like your insinuating the same thing. Or, maybe you are insinuating the same thing and hope no one realizes it. :o)

  7. 2manyidiotfans says: May 12, 2011 5:43 PM

    what a sham – everyone else has to do their job in a timely manner & be accountable. RULE on this already. There’s no way a justice system can think that by not ruling they’re helping both sides. State your ruling on Judge Nelson’s decision then handle the appeal as our system dictates. Right now, they are not acting within the system – they’re simply trying to play “God” here. That’s not your job & it’s not the way the law works – Get on with it already!

  8. suckittrebek76 says: May 12, 2011 5:46 PM

    Maybe we should start pretending like we don’t care. Would that put an end to all this nonsense.

  9. mick730 says: May 12, 2011 5:50 PM

    “Fans are getting screwed while you fight over petty issues.”

    Fans aren’t getting screwed. Nobody owes you football, especially in May. You want to talk screwed? Talk to somebody getting audited by the IRS, or somebody whose house has dropped in value by 75% while the mortgage payment and the property taxes stay the same. Screwed? Really? Because you can’t watch football in May? Screwed?

    Do you like paying $4.00 per gallon for gasoline? How about working four days out of ten for the government so they can play Santa Claus with your money?

    No? Not experiencing any of these things or know anybody who is? Then I guess you either live with Mom and Dad or you are living a charmed existence.

    Screwed by ass.

  10. smacklayer says: May 12, 2011 5:51 PM

    I guess there really is no irrepairable harm going on. On my brief research of that term, from what I have read courts mostly will only assign such a term when something truly cannot be reversed, such as a company dumping chemicals, capitol punishment, digging up a historical site, copyright infrigments, etc. This NFLPA suit is only about money and loss of money in and of itself is not irreversable.

    A case could be made that some rookie free agents are not getting the opportunity to try out for teams, but again this is easily reversable – once the season starts, these players can try to make the teams at that point. Nothing irrepairable is happening right now.

  11. brdnc says: May 12, 2011 5:55 PM

    Sorry, but it makes no sense for a judge not to want to “tip his hand.” Judges want to give the impression of being fair and listening to all sides during arguments, but for a judge to hold off ruling because he doesn’t want to tip his hand makes no sense. Could be lots of reasons for no ruling. Most likely among them is that they’re inclined to rule the same way on the permanent stay as they did on the temporary stay, and so no need to do extra work on another (intermediate) opinion that would do the same thing they’ve essentially already done. While judges dont’ care about tipping their hands in rulings (at least none of the judges did when I clerked) they do care about doing extra work for no reason.

  12. willycents says: May 12, 2011 6:01 PM

    lol…they have ruled. They STAYED judge judy’s injunction. The real question remaining is do they make the stay permanent or lift it, pending hearing on the appeal. As I stated when the stay was first issued…in place until oral arguments on June 3. Then, at some time after that, say two weeks, they will issue a ruling on the merits of the appeal; and POSSIBLY lift the stay.
    In my limited experience, normal courts stay an injunction for a few days to allow time to file an appeal. IF the court decides that the appeal has merit, they will leave the injunction in place, even though it is called “temporary.”
    difference between a temporary injunction and a permanent injunction = words

  13. nfl25 says: May 12, 2011 6:05 PM

    The ONLY way this thing gets done is if the players feel they have to negotiate. The owners will shut down if they have to. They aren’t happy with the current deal and opted out (as they were allowed to). They aren’t gonna just stay with the current deal cuz the players have all the leverage and wont negotiate in good faith. No way there is football unless the owners gain leverage and force the players to negotiate. The sooner the players start negotiating, the sooner we will have football, and the players wont negotiate unless they absolutley have to.

    Anyone who cares about the game should hope the owners get some kind of leverage to force the players back to the table

  14. txchief says: May 12, 2011 6:06 PM

    Sounds to me like the appeals court is allowing the players to twist in the wind on this one.

  15. ICDogg says: May 12, 2011 6:10 PM

    If you think about it, does it really hurt anyone that much to have a lockout or not in May? The damage has already been done as far as not having it lifted to have free agency and trades before/during the draft and nothing much is going on now except some minicamps that can’t be scheduled.

  16. ravensfan4life52 says: May 12, 2011 6:11 PM

    This judge needs to hurry the F$CK UP! I’m tired of waiting for this hearing. it’s stupid just make up your d*mn mind. you heard all of the evidence. you don’t need an extra 2 weeks.

  17. txchief says: May 12, 2011 6:21 PM

    If the appeals court lifts the lockout, and it is upheald in the Supreme Court, it will be a serious blow not just to the NFL and the team owners, but to businesses in general in this country. Until recently, it would seem impossible to imagine that the courts/federal government would force a business to operate against its’ will. The ruling by the NLRB against Boeing opening a new plant in North Carolina compunds the situation a reveals how far the socialists/marxists have come to controlling this country and forwarding anti-business/anti-free enterprise/collectivist policies.

  18. willycents says: May 12, 2011 6:31 PM

    ravensfan4life52 says:May 12, 2011 6:11 PM

    This judge needs to hurry the F$CK UP! I’m tired of waiting for this hearing. it’s stupid just make up your d*mn mind. you heard all of the evidence. you don’t need an extra 2 weeks.
    ———————————————

    I hope that they take whatever time needed to get the decision correct. I wonder if you say that when you are in court, or if you would prefer the judge/jury to just rule on their first impulse. Heck, sounds almost like my g/f talking there…lol

  19. sterilizecromartie says: May 12, 2011 6:35 PM

    Just wake me when this crap is over. I don’t know what any of this means, nor do I care to learn about what any of it means.

  20. bronco1st says: May 12, 2011 6:36 PM

    The judges were tripping all over themselves to grant the temporary stay within hours of the owner’s request – even worked on a Saturday to issue it during the draft. Sorry bunch of prejudiced, biased, corrupt, dishonest, perverse, egotistical, moral-less jerk-offs with god complexes soiling the robes of our judicial system. Sad to see what money can buy these days.

  21. src3346 says: May 12, 2011 6:39 PM

    To really make this interesting the National labor Relations Board (NLRB) should rule on the NFLPA and their sham decertification.

  22. hail2tharedskins says: May 12, 2011 6:40 PM

    2manyidiotfans,

    I am not sure what your issue which the 8th Circuit is, the have already ruled on the stay. Some people assumed that they would make a separate ruling on a permanent stay, but considering that they announced that they would be expediting the appeal the temporary stay is sufficient – no need to rule on the longer stay unless they intend to deny it. If the consensus is to allow the stay to remain, there is no need for the judges to make any further ruling, and their clerk has explicitly said so. The fact that people keep waiting on a ruling is a little mind boggling to me. The standard to grant a emergency (temp) stay (according to the dissenting judge) is greater than that for the standard stay, so there really is no reason to expect them to alter their decision. As for whether or not they are acting within the system, they have expedited the case so I am not sure what more you want from them. I guess that does mean they are acting outside of the system, but what do you want them to do stick with the normal timeline and wait to hear the case in Jul/Aug? The real issue is that Judge Nelson should have stayed her own ruling pending appeal (that is the normal process even if not required). By not staying her own ruling pending the appeal, she forced the appeals court to enter an emergency stay (or any stay for that matter) that they otherwise shouldn’t have even had to deal with. So if anybody was operating outside the system, I think you should blame the circuit court judge, not the appellate court. Whether or not her ruling is upheld on appeal, she knew or should have known the wide ranging implications and the fact that her decision was far from appeal proof, the only time stays are denied (or should be denied) is when a judge is very confident that their ruling will not be overturned and that there is no reason to delay the implementation of the ruling. Since there is nobody who doesn’t think Judge Nelson’s lengthy (70+page) order was to defend her ruling on appeal, she clearly knew that her ruling was on shaking ground, otherwise no reason to go to such lengths to defend it. I have no problem with Judge Nelson’s ruling, but I have a big problem with the fact that she was willing to deny the league the ability to appeal her ruling before she implemented it, and I am pretty sure that the appeals court is equally bothered by that (hence the emergency stay grant) and the fact that they would be forced to grant such a stay in order to even review her ruling. I said before she made her ruling that it made no sense for her not to grant a stay since she knew that an appeal was coming (from either side), the 8th circuit had already said they were ready for the case and even if she didn’t grant it that the 8th circuit would grant one of their own anyway. Judges don’t usually like to have their decisions overturned, but Judge Nelson was begging for her decision on the stay to be overturned and I am guessing it is a likely preview of what will happen with her original order. Did she really think the 8th circuit was going to say oh well since she didn’t stay the ruling, we will just ignore it and allow the appeal in front of us to be moot by the time we hear the case and then our ruling will be meaningless so maybe we shouldn’t even hear the appeal???

  23. snaponrules says: May 12, 2011 6:53 PM

    The greedy POS Owners are getting what they want. No football, they could care less about the fans. Only in trying to starve out their workforce to make sure they agree to a deal that will make the billionaires bigger billionaires.
    They have been planing for this lockout for years and now they got what they want.
    Must have an extra billion dollars because we are going broke, show you the books. No just trust us we are going broke. How could you even think Jerrah Jones is anything but a fine upstanding and honest business man?
    Anybody that sides with the owners in this deal is just clueless.

  24. hail2tharedskins says: May 12, 2011 6:57 PM

    bronco1st,

    Only problem with your rant is that the the stay was actually granted on a Friday. NOT a Saturday!
    I guess you just had a rant prepared and decided you would make the circumstances fit your argument.

  25. rcali says: May 12, 2011 7:01 PM

    Ask Dolphin and Jets employees about “irreparable harm”

  26. skindome1234 says: May 12, 2011 8:12 PM

    just three self important old toads hanging on to what ever 15 mins of fame they can!!!!! the whole justice system blows!!!! these guys are exact examples of whats wrong with the system. how the hell could it take two weeks to decide anything??? it”s yes or no @#$holes!!!

  27. commandercornpone says: May 12, 2011 8:42 PM

    the NLRB would come down on the side of their and bam’s fellow traveler, duh smith.

  28. thefiesty1 says: May 12, 2011 9:02 PM

    No news is good news! Especially all this lockout and litigation crap.

  29. roniii says: May 12, 2011 9:22 PM

    As a Seahawk fan, I am dying for free agency to start.

  30. bronco1st says: May 12, 2011 9:34 PM

    hail2tharedskins,
    Saturday or Friday, what’s the difference? My point wasn’t about the day – or did you miss that? In fact, it only reinforces my comment that the judges raced to grant their bosses wishes but are dragging their feet on the player request. The fact that it happened in 1 day LESS than what I thought says what? Go back to polishing the owners shoes.

  31. hail2tharedskins says: May 12, 2011 10:10 PM

    bronco1st,

    There is a big difference between Saturday and Friday. Mainly that all judges work on Fridays. Suggesting they came in on a Saturday to issue the stay was completely false and showed just how ignorant you were to facts about the situation you are discussing. As for them racing to make a decision… you didn’t get that right either, they did not rule in hours but in days. The court allowed ample time for both the owners and players to submit briefs arguing their position on the motion for stay and even rebuttal briefs before they issued their ruling. And if you had any clue what the purpose of a stay is in our legal system, you would realize that is something that is supposed to be addressed expeditiously. Now what exactly is the player request you think they are dragging their feet on? The players have absolutely no request in front of the 8th circuit. The little thing called facts again getting in your way. The league is the one who petitioned the court for the temporary stay as well as a permanent stay and the appeal of Judge Nelson’s original ruling. Is their another request pending before the 8th circuit that I am not aware of that was filed by the players? If so please enlighten me, if not please go enlighten yourself before you before posting again.

  32. easyeddie says: May 12, 2011 10:17 PM

    hail2tharedskins,
    Saturday or Friday, what’s the difference? My point wasn’t about the day – or did you miss that? In fact, it only reinforces my comment that the judges raced to grant their bosses wishes but are dragging their feet on the player request. The fact that it happened in 1 day LESS than what I thought says what? Go back to polishing the owners shoes.

    ———————————-
    Read hail2tharedskins’ earlier post — maybe you’ll learn something.

  33. lostsok says: May 12, 2011 10:46 PM

    The owners take tax dollars to rebuild their stadiums for a sport with a VERY rare anti-trust exemption…and yet they act like this is a typical business and they are just “businessmen.”

    WRONG.

    Football is a public trust that affects millions, directly or indirectly.

    The OWNERS should be fired and given to responsible parties with the needed humility to run them for the public/municipal benefit, and NOT for the sake of their over-sized egos.

    It’s not the union that’s “ruining” football. It’s Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder and their ilk.

  34. bronco1st says: May 13, 2011 2:42 AM

    hail2tharedskins,
    Go enlighten yourself since you are the one who is apparently ignorant of the proceedings. First of all, Fri. or Sat. makes little difference to my original point, if it’s a big deal to you okay, like I said, it reinforces my contention that the court acted within hours to grant the owners wishes.

    Timeline; Judge Nelson hands down her decision to lift the lockout on Mon, 4/25/2011. Owners ignored it on Tues and Wed the 26th and 27th, asking for further instructions from Nelson. Wed. the 27th Nelson reiterates to order to go back to business as usual. Owners then file a motion in the 8th circuit court on the 28th asking for a administrative temporary stay of the lower court’s ruling (Nelson’s) and also filed for an expedited ruling. The next day, the 29th, the 8th granted that motion for a temporary stay, within hours, like I said to begin with.

    If anyone is ignorant to the facts, it is you. Are you a lawyer for the owners? They don’t seem to know what’s going on either. People like you shoot off their mouths as if they know it all. You don’t have a clue Red, not a clue.

    Further, do you know the difference between an administrative temporary stay and a permanent stay? Both sides submitted briefs arguing their positions on the motion filed by the owners on the 29th to make the temporary stay a permanent stay until the 8th hears and rules on the legality of the District court’s (Nelson’s) ruling, scheduled to begin on June 3rd.

    So yeah, the owners have a motion in the 8th asking to make the temporary stay permanent. The players lawyers have filed briefs arguing against it. The stay is TEMPORARY and the court has been dragging their feet for two weeks as of today on deciding whether to side with the player’s submitted briefs on the matter of removing the temporary, or with the owners making it permanent.

    What the court is doing is ruling by not ruling. In effect, it does the same thing that a pocket veto does by a president, in other words, taking action by not taking action. You probably won’t get it. Go back to polishing the owners shoes, you make a lousy lawyer. Oh and stop posting yourself if that’s all ya got to add to the conversation. There’s plenty of ignorance going on in this mess, no need for any additions by you.

  35. bronco1st says: May 13, 2011 2:45 AM

    easyeddie’

    Pull your head out and you nose will follow. Either learn something yourself or keep yer yap shut!

  36. bronco1st says: May 13, 2011 3:13 AM

    hail2tharedskins,

    Oh and furthermore, whether or not the 8th will ever get off their high horse and actually rule on the motion before them to make the administrative temporary stay permanent or not, it will do nothing to alter their ability to rule on the appeal of Judge Nelson’s ruling.

    The only thing it will do is to allow business to continue as usual up to the scheduled June 3rd hearing and beyond until they hand down a ruling on the legality of Nelson’s ruling, which could take up to 6-8 weeks. It also would not hamper negotiations scheduled to resume on the 20th. In fact, it may actually help speed up the negotiations and make the owners bargain in earnest. In any event, the trial could take weeks, maybe months and it would take us to the beginning of August or later, meaning no OTAs or mini-camps maybe even training camp and the loss of preseason games. Maybe your Skins don’t need any of that to compete with the established teams, but my Broncos do and I’m for anything that allows the season to go on as normal while the rich, spoiled brats (both sides) have their legal eagles slug it out in court.

  37. weneedlinemen42 says: May 13, 2011 7:24 AM

    It might be an outrageous notion, but perhaps the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit actually has other stuff to do than rule a labour dispute in an indutry where everyone is making obscene amounts of money.

    I presume it was dealing with other cases, and wasn’t set-up to just sit around waiting for a sports union to decertify. Maybe they’re dealing with the important stuff first, before getting round to a case which essentially revolves around who gets an extra billion.

  38. hail2tharedskins says: May 13, 2011 8:30 AM

    bronco1st,

    Still wrong. The request for a stay was filed with the 8th circuit on 4/27 and granted on 4/29. Get it in your thick head, it was done in days NOT hours! These dates as well as all filings can easily be found on the 8th circuit’s website. LIKE I SAID GO ENLIGHTEN YOURSELF! Its the third time I’ve told you your facts were wrong and yet you keep spouting incorrect information. I understand the difference between a temporary stay and a permanent stay, I also understand that the court has expedited the hearing on the case and therefore the administrative stay is sufficient to get them to the hearing – and the court has said so. Even the players’ lawyers have said they expect no ruling on the permanent stay. Their is no feet dragging, they are moving to the actual appeal of the ruling on the lockout on an expedited manner (which the players asked for) . Yes, you are right they are ruling by not ruling – the fact that they are not ruling on the permanent stay says we already granted a stay and since we do not intend to lift the stay it is pointless to rule again, how many times do they did to say the stay is granted? The league has already submitted its opening brief and the players’ lawyers are now preparing theirs. All parties, judges and lawyers have moved passed the stay at this point – the stay is in place and the hearing is already in motion.

    I will just ignore your personal shots at me and my team.

  39. bronco1st says: May 13, 2011 12:49 PM

    hail2tharedskins said;

    “The real issue is that Judge Nelson should have stayed her own ruling pending appeal (that is the normal process even if not required). By not staying her own ruling pending the appeal, she forced the appeals court to enter an emergency stay (or any stay for that matter) that they otherwise shouldn’t have even had to deal with. So if anybody was operating outside the system, [u]I think you should blame the circuit court judge, not the appellate court[/u].”

    The circuit court [u]IS[/u] the appellate court. Nelson’s court is the district court. Go enlighten yourself before posting again.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!