NFL Lockout Update: Settle or Else!
Now don't get me wrong, I prefer to practice in front of tough judges who aren't afraid to use their authority to "crack heads" when necessary to get to a fair and proper settlement. Yet, some judical-style "threats" are starting to get old.
At the last court appearance for the NFL and the Players, Judge Bye told the parties that they should settle or there would be a decision that "neither side would like."
Now what does that really mean? If the NFL and Players don't settle, the court is going to do something crazy? Don't the parties (even in this case) both have the right to expect the court will fairly apply to law to the facts of the case and make a learned decision? Of course, they do.
The problem with this judicial tactic, in my humble view, is that it is very over used. In almost every case that I am involved with I get it at some point and it goes pretty much without any reaction. As my grandmother used to say "in one ear and out the other."
I think it would be much more effective if the court told the NFL and its players that they should settle because it is shameful that judicial resources are being wasted on the question of how rich owners and wealthy players are going to slice up a $9 billion pie.
My name is Christopher Fusco. I am the managing partner of Callahan & Fusco, LLC with offices in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.