Updated – Taylor’s lawsuit was amended earlier this afternoon – Jan. 2, 2013.
On December 31st, 2-time All-Pro and Kansas City Chiefs legend, Otis Taylor (70), filed a lawsuit against the NFL and Roger Goodell. According to the lawsuit obtained by NFLConcussionLitigation.com, Taylor requires “constant medical care and supervision.”
During his career, according to his lawsuit, Taylor “suffered seizures in 1969 while he played professional football.” In 1990 Taylor was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease and dementia. “He is currently bedridden, cannot verbally communicate, is unable to walk, and relies on a feeding tube for all his sustenance ,” according to his lawsuit. Taylor alleges that the NFL is legally responsible for his injuries.
Taylor’s complaint provides grim details into life after football for some former players. Taylor was once a powerful flanker, who is now severally debilitated by neurodegenerative diseases caused by numerous concussive and sub-concussive blows on the gridiron.
It is important to remember that the older guys, especially pre-1993 players, never received huge contracts, and their families are now forced to pay for medical expenses out of their own pocket. Although the NFL provides funding through the 88 Plan, these funds are insufficient to provide for the full medical care players need, and they do not reimburse/compensate caretakers who have to give up their livelihood and jobs to care for their loved ones.
Taylor’s lawsuit will soon be removed to federal court and then transferred to Philadelphia to be consolidated with the other 195-plus concussion lawsuits.
The number of former players suing the NFL continues to grow by the week. In the month of December alone, more than 70 players joined the NFL Concussion Litigation Club.
The number of former players suing the NFL has eclipsed 4,000. There are approximately 12,000 living, former players. More than 1/3 of all players to ever sign an NFL contract are now taking on the shield, seeking a piece of that $9.5 billion pie the former players helped create.
Three separate wrongful death lawsuits were filed on behalf of the late Cookie Gilchrist (75), Hall of Famer Joe Perry (84) and Gerry Huth (77). Shortly after their deaths, Gilchrist’s and Perry’s brain was donated to Boston University to be examined for CTE. Both players reportedly were diagnosed with the neurodegenerative brain disease. According to the Buffalo News, Gilchrist’s CTE was in Stage IV – the most severe. Perry’s CTE was not as advanced, but he still showed an excessive presence of tau protein.
A few other notable players to file suit in the past month include Marvin Fleming and Freddie Nunn. In 2008, Nunn was sentenced to 20 years in prison after being convicted of possessing more than 30 pounds of cocaine.
The most prominent living player to file suit this month was All-Pro Neil Smith. His lawsuit alleges that he is currently suffering from cognitive impairment and early-onset dementia. In addition, Smith alleges that he suffered three concussions in one game during his rookie season in 1988. According to his lawsuit, all three went undiagnosed and untreated. Smith is represented by Mark Gilmore of Burmeister Gilmore, LLP.
Updated – Jan. 2, 2013
On December 31st, 2-time All-Pro and Kansas City Chiefs legend, Otis Taylor (70), filed a lawsuit against the NFL and Roger Goodell. According to the lawsuit obtained by NFLConcussionLitigation.com, Taylor requires “constant medical care and supervision.”
As always, the lawsuits will continue to be filed, and we’ll continue to wait for Judge Brody to determine if the players’ claims belong in court.
Experts in NFL Concussion Suits join together to tackle industry trends, litigation challenges, and the science in sports injuries on Jan. 8.
Berwyn, PA – Perrin Conferences‘ teleconference series presents “NFL Concussion Litigation – The Science of Sport,” a program bringing together leading attorneys, doctors and other experts to discuss the issues dominating the headlines of the concussion cases against the NFL, NCAA and equipment manufacturers. The teleconference will be hosted on Jan. 8 at 2:00 p.m.- 4:00 p.m. EST.
The program provides an overview of the current allegations and defenses in NFL concussion litigation, an update on the latest scientific studies, and tackles other issues including:
- The potential legal and economic impact of concussion litigation for players, sports leagues and uniform equipment manufacturers
- Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy – what is it and how does the science fit into the current litigation strategies?
- The history of the dangers of head injuries and the timeline of NFL-sponsored studies/concussion rules
- Medical monitoring and other potential damages
- Duty to defend, trigger, occurrence and other insurance issues
Speakers include former 7-year NFL player, Scott Thomas Peters and Dr. Andrew Blecher, Medical Director for the Southern California Orthopedic Institute in Van Nuys, CA. who will lead a faculty including attorney David Langfitt of the Locks Law Firm in Philadelphia and defense attorney Timothy Liam Epstein, Chair of the Sports Law Practice Group of SmithAmundsen, LLC in Chicago. In addition, Charles Mullin, Ph.D. of Bates White LLC in Washington, D.C., will provide an update on current insurance litigation and discuss potential emerging coverage issues. Paul Anderson, Esq., of the NFL Concussion Litigation Blog and Dustin Fink, MS, ATC, of The Concussion Blog in Shelbyville, IL will moderate this sports litigation conference.
For more information about the event and to register, visit www.perrinconferences.com.
Perrin Conferences sets the precedent in legal conferences. The conference company hosts insurance and law conferences, with CLE-accreditation, and delivers a balanced plaintiff and defense perspective, working with renowned in-house counsel, plaintiff and defense attorneys, and other insurance and litigation experts. Perrin Conferences delivers outstanding agendas and meaningful business networking opportunities. For more information, please visit www.PerrinConferences.com or contact Lynnsey Perrin Hee at 610-804-6165.
By Stuart Dean
It began as a comedy–a farce–how else can you characterize some of the calls made by the replacement refs?
But no one can be laughing now at the tragic turn not of what is on the field but off of it, stage right, so to speak.
At a time when we are accustomed to having news presented in HD and surround sound (or at least graphically enhanced with computer animation) the bare facts of a last kiss on the forehead of the dying mother of a daughter or the obviously pathetic attempt of a friend to pull a friend from a wrecked and burning car create images on their own that for most (other than those exclusively devoted to seeking out real or fantasy betting lines) will not be easily erased.
It all seems unspeakably tragic–the last thing you need is any sound or video enhancement–you want to grab a poet for the right line or phrase. He is not the only one and these are not the only lines that might help make sense of this, but these lines of Shakespeare, memorized years ago in college, came to my mind and seemed to resonate not only with what for a moment at least Belcher and Brent might have been thinking as they confronted the reality of the death they caused, but what in some sense many ‘fans’ of football must now think about every Sunday, if not every Friday night that bleeds into Saturday morning:
Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing.
UPDATED – December 11
As part of the 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement, the parties agreed to create a neuro-cognitive benefit plan. I applaud the NFL and NFLPA for getting the plan finalized.
The timing of the benefits is intriguing, and they may have an impact on the players in the NFL concussion lawsuits.
Here’s a quick breakdown of the benefits. The following should not be construed as legal advice, and it is provided for educational purposes only.
Who is eligible for the benefits? (A player must meet all of the requirements below)
- A vested player
- 5 credited seasons, or
- Three credited seasons, including one after the 1992 season
- He has at least one Credited Season after 1994
- He is under the age of 55
- He is not receiving any other retirement or total and permanent disability benefits under the NFL Plan
- The player is found “by the Plan’s neutral physicians to meet the Plan’s standards for mild or moderate neuro-cognitive impairment”
- He signs a Release and Covenant Not to Sue
What benefits will be paid?
- If a player is found to have mild neuro-cognitive impairment, he will receive monthly benefits of at least $1,500.
- If a player is found to have moderate neuro-cognitive impairment, he will receive monthly benefits of at least $3,000.
- He may also qualify for reimbursement for medical expenses related to neuro-cognitive treatment, up to $10,000 per year.
How long will the benefits be paid?
- The benefits will be payable for no more than 15 years, and the benefits will terminate at the age of 55. (at which time a player may be able to pursue other benefits under the Plan – e.g. Total and Permanent disability)
In order to determine if a player has mild or moderate neuro-cognitive impairment, the player will be scheduled for a comprehensive medical examination. The Plan’s Disability Committee will then determine if the player qualifies. The Committee is comprised of three members: one member is appointed by the NFLPA, one member is appointed by the NFL, and the third member will be the Plan’s Medical Director.
What if I am receiving Line-of-Duty Disability Benefits?
According to the League office, you cannot receive Line-of-Duty (LOD) Disability Benefits and Neuro-Cognitive Benefits simultaneously. You can apply for both, but you will only receive the greater of the two benefits (i.e. LOD or Moderate Neuro-Cog Benefits).
For example, if you are currently receiving $2,000/mo. for LOD Benefits, and you apply for and qualify for Moderate Neuro-Conitive Benefits, then you must choose whether to continue to receive LOD benefits or the $3,000/mo. under the Moderate Neuro-Cognitive Benefits. It is best to consult with your family and attorney when making this decision.
This is the first major shortcoming of the Neuro-Cognitive Benefits. In my opinion, a player should be able to receive LOD and Neuro-Cognitive Benefits simultaneously. LOD benefits are primarily for orthopedic injuries, while Neuro-Cognitive Benefits are for the brain. It makes ZERO sense that a player, suffering from both orthopedic injuries and cognitive disorders, cannot receive both simultaneously.
Yet again, the NFLPA failed to negotiate a better deal in this regard. But for now, it appears, a majority of former players will have to wait — until their LOD benefits terminate — while their neurological condition gets progressively worse before they can receive Neuro-Cognitive benefits.
The Final Kicker
In order to receive the benefits, the player must sign a release promising not to sue the NFL. In other words, if a player accepts the benefits he cannot join the NFL concussion lawsuits. Stated differently, if a player is currently a plaintiff in the concussion lawsuits, in order to receive the benefits, he will likely have to dismiss his lawsuit. The release will not waive any future workers’ compensation claim he may have against a team.
The plaintiffs in the concussion lawsuits, that played after 1994, have a decision to make: should I accept the benefits under this plan, or should I continue to purse my claim against the NFL and hope that it will be successful?
Of course, the plaintiffs’ lawyers in the concussion lawsuits are likely advising their clients not to pursue these benefits (perhaps out of self-interest).
But, the reality is, there is absolutely no guarantee the concussion lawsuits will be successful. If a player is suffering from a neuro-cognitive disorder, then he shouldn’t wait around for the lawsuit to run its course. It will likely take years for the lawsuits to be resolved; during that time several players may have already missed their opportunity to file a claim because they reached the age of 55.
A player needs to make an informed decision and most importantly consider his health and financial situation. A player likely will not have to dismiss his lawsuit until he qualifies for the benefits, at which time, he can weigh his decision: take the benefits or proceed against the NFL in my concussion lawsuit.
Again, I applaud the NFL and the NFLPA. I am hopefully optimistic that this is a step in the right direction to ensuring players are able to have a quality life after retirement. However, if history is any indicator, the Disability Board may be quick to deny claims – but I hope that will not be the case.
If you are a former player interested in discussing your rights, feel free to drop me an email at PaulD_Anderson@me.com or contact me at 573-528-6478.
The following is the text of the RELEASE AND COVENANT NOT TO SUE that Players must sign to obtain the Neuro-Cognitive Disability Benefit:
In consideration for the benefit provided under Article 65 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NFL Management Council and the NFLPA, Player, on his own behalf and on behalf of his personal representatives, heirs, next of kin, executors, administrators, estate, assigns, and/or any person or entity on his behalf, hereby waives and releases and forever discharges the NFL and its Clubs, and their respective past, current and future affiliates, directors, officers, owners, stockholders, trustees, partners, servants and employees (excluding persons employed as players by a Club) and all of their respective predecessors, successors and assigns (collectively, the “NFL Releases”) of and from any and all claims, actions, causes of actions, liabilities, suits, demands, damages, losses, payments, judgments, debts, dues, sums of money, costs and expenses, accounts, in law or equity, contingent or non-contingent, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected (“Claims”) that the Player has, had, may now have, or may have in the future arising out of, relating to, or in connection with any head and/or brain injury of whatever cause and its damages (whether short-term, long-term, or death) whenever arising, including without limitation neurocognitive deficits of any degree, and Player covenants not to sue the NFL Releases with respect to any such Claim or pursue any such Claim against the NFL Releases in any forum. This release, waiver and covenant not to sue includes without limitation all Claims arising under the tort laws of any state and extends to all damages (including without limitation short-term and/or long-term effects of such injury and death) whenever arising, including without limitation after execution of this release, waiver and covenant not to sue. Player further acknowledges that he has read and understands Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads as follows:
A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know
or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if
known by him must have materially affected his settlement with the debtor.
Player expressly waives and relinquishes all rights and benefits under that section and any law of any jurisdiction of similar effect with respect to the release of any unknown or unsuspected claims released hereunder that Player may have against the NFL Releases. This release, waiver and covenant not to sue shall have no effect upon any right that Player may have to insurance or other benefits available under any Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NFL Management Council and the NFLPA, or under the workers’ compensation laws, and Player acknowledges and agrees that such rights, if any, are his sole and exclusive remedies for any Claims.
Player acknowledges and agrees that the provision of the benefit under Article 65 shall not be construed as an admission or concession by the NFL Releases or any of them that NFL football caused or causes, in whole or in part, the medical conditions covered by the benefit, or as an admission of liability or wrongdoing by the NFL Releases or any of them, and the NFL Releases expressly deny any such admission, concession, liability or wrongdoing.
By Contributor Stuart Dean
Although the football season is not yet over there are already three important lessons to be learned from it regarding concussion litigation:
First, quite apart from how it ultimately affects plaintiffs and defendants, litigation has consequences even before there is any settlement or judgment. There should not be any doubt that the changes in the threshold for drawing a flag for a potentially concussion inducing hit as well as the protocol the NFL has adopted for when a concussion is suspected are a direct consequence of the growing number of claims against the NFL for MTBI related injuries by former players. That is startling when you consider none of the lawsuits have been settled or adjudicated and the resolution of most of the litigation is years away. The benefit of these changes for the NFL is to minimize, if not eliminate, the accrual of additional liability. The downside, though, is that the changes make practically every game an advertisement for the effectiveness of litigation. To be sure, such changes provide no benefit to existing plaintiffs and could not even be used as the basis for an argument about the validity of past claims. But in litigation, perception is often as important as reality. And the perception now has to be that the plaintiffs are winning and winning big.
Second, both the number and severity of concussions should be considered shocking. It appears that in every game at least one player on each team suffers a concussion. Because of the realities of playing times and position assignments it is difficult to avoid concluding that with a 16 game season for many players the question is not whether they will suffer a concussion but when. But as troubling as the number of concussions should be, the severity should be even more so. This season’s concussed players often miss several games and in some cases questions have been raised about careers being in jeopardy. Yet, many of these concussions do not appear to relate to rule violating hits, but rather from ordinary play. What this shows is that the NFL’s attempt to limit concussion liability by tweaking the rules simply does not work. Having first denied concussions were an issue at all, the NFL is attempting to define away the problem rather than confront fundamental facts. Consider, for example, the weight of players. In many respects nothing is more fundamental than weight. For example, the very reason weight classes exist in boxing is predicated on the well recognized fact that weight is not just a factor in fighting, but all other factors being equal, the decisive one. No one would think of organizing fights between boxers with the sorts weight differentials you see on every play of every game in football. Furthermore, no boxing match lasts 2 or 3 hours and boxers generally do not run at each other at full speed. The tale of the tape–in this case the videotape–is that as currently played football is frighteningly more dangerous than boxing.
The third lesson comes from thinking through the implications of the first two. For with the combination of (1) an increasing awareness not just of the existence of concussion litigation but the perception of its effectiveness and (2) a still growing awareness of the extent and nature of football induced concussions you have the ingredients for what could be a substantial increase, indeed an explosion, in litigation. Put simply, not only are more and more people becoming aware that they or someone they know may have suffered concussions from what at the time seemed to be ordinary football plays, but at the same time they are learning that legal liability for such injuries may attach to those who promote football: a growing pool of plaintiffs on the prowl for defendants. The pleadings of the plaintiffs in the current cases suggest the direction this could go. Some contain claims for the spouses of veteran players–loss of consortium. Dementia from MTBI is not, after all, something that affects only the player. Many claims characterize the NFL not just with respect to professional football, but more generally, as being in a unique position of having been able to glorify and mythologize American football. To the extent that constitutes the basis for a claim of liability it is hard to see why it should be confined to professional players; practically anyone who plays football could claim to have been affected by NFL hype. Some claims are based on the doctrine of civil conspiracy. I will not belabor the point here other than to say that depending on the state law implicated, such a doctrine can be flexible for plaintiffs but mischievous for defendants. It might only be something to scribble in a blue book answering a law exam question, but it is the sort of doctrine that could draw the NFL, the broadcasters of all its games and their respective sponsors into litigation as defendants to a concussion claim by a high school student.
The basic takeaway is that there is much more litigation to come with many more people involved.
The following is a piece that was published in the August edition of the Concussion Litigation Reporter. Today’s report by ESPN and the Fainaru brothers re-opens the question: Why hasn’t the NFLPA been sued for concealing the link between concussions and long-term damage? If the Retirement Board ruled, in 1999, that there was a link, then didn’t the NFLPA have a duty to inform the players? The Retirement Board is comprised of three player representatives. Why didn’t they bargain for increased benefits and protection for the current and former players?
4th Circuit’s decision overturning the Board’s decision to deny medical benefits to Mike Webster.
CLR — This week the NFL will seek to slam the court door shut on the 3,000 plus players suing the league over head injuries, when it files a motion to dismiss on August 30th. Meanwhile, the NFLPA has sat idly by closely watching the litigation, but it has not even whispered comments about the lawsuits publicly.
Thus far, the NFLPA and the majority of teams have remained off the NFL head injury litigation docket.
The first concussion-related lawsuit named the NFL and Riddell Helmets as a defendant. Since then, the flock of concussion lawsuits has followed this strategy: suing the NFL individually or the NFL, NFL Properties and Riddell.
In May, a group of lawyers decided to change course and target several NFL teams – See Jimmie Giles v. NFL, Buccaneers, Lions, Bills, Dolphins, Eagles, Titans et al.
Though the teams were not technically named as defendants prior to this lawsuit, they, nonetheless, were implicitly part of the litigation. First, the master complaint alleges that the NFL, clubs, independent contractors, among others, conspired to conceal the risks about concussions. Second, the financial structure of the NFL invariably comprises both the League and the owners, though the holding in American Needle v. NFL et al suggests otherwise.
The Supreme Court in American Needle held that the NFL is not a single entity; rather, it is comprised of 32 individual entities, which are “independently owned [and] independently managed businesses….” American Needle Inc. v. NFL et al, 130 S. Ct. 2201 (2010).
At the end of the day, however, a significant portion of a settlement or judgment may come out of the owners’ pocket.
The NFL as Mastermind
The crux of the former players’ complaint, and where the lawsuits really have teeth, is that the NFL voluntarily inserted itself into the concussion discussion by creating the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Committee in 1994. (And from all accounts, failed miserably.)
According to the complaint, Commissioner Paul Taglibue agreed to create the Committee. However, it is unclear whether this decision was made solely by Commissioner Taglibue and the NFL or if the owners and NFLPA had a voice.
If the plaintiffs get past the first major hurdle — preemption issue — discovery will begin, and the first inquiry will focus on the creation of the MTBI Committee (i.e. who, what, when, where and why).
If it is determined that the owners and the league conspired together, then it appears that the teams are equally as culpable in allegedly concealing information from the players.
The players’ current argument is that the NFL acted as the nerve center for concussion research and policy: whatever the NFL said about player safety and concussions, the owners and thereby the team doctors and trainers, were mandated to listen. This is in line with some accounts that several team doctors voiced their dissent over the research done by the MTBI Committee but were silenced or shunned on numerous occasions. See Dr. William Barr
In other words, the NFL, acting alone, was the mastermind of implementing guidelines, or the lack thereof, and allegedly perpetrating fraud on the current and former players.
The NFL will rebut this argument in its motion to dismiss and argue that the respective CBAs delegated health and safety concerns to the teams, team doctors and trainers.
Why all teams are not yet defendants
By targeting the teams it strengthens the argument that these lawsuits are barred by workers’ compensation. NFL players are employees of the team in which they play for.. As part of this employer-employee relationship, workers’ compensation is generally the exclusive remedy for work-related injuries. In other words, employees give up the right to sue in exchange for workers’ compensation benefits (i.e. if you are injured on the job, you are entitled to benefits regardless of fault.)
However, there is an exception to the exclusive-remedy rule, which may allow an employee to sue his employer if the injury was intentional (i.e. fraud, battery, etc.). Here, the players are arguing that the teams purposefully misled the players about the long-term risks about concussions. Of course, this will be very difficult to prove unless the proverbial “smoking gun” memo is found during the discovery process.
The NFL may also use the exclusive-remedy argument later down the road, but the NFL’s argument isn’t as strong because it is not the employer of the players.
Suing the teams
It appears to be a viable strategy to name the teams as defendants, at least to woo the public’s opinion in favor of the players. As we saw in the lockout, the public embraces the “millionaire vs. billionaire” argument. Take it a step further and give the defendants a face: former players dying and suffering, unable to afford health care vs. billionaire owners (e.g. Jerry Jones, as opposed to just the NFL Shield). That picture might resonate with a jury.
Another reason why the teams were targeted is because the attorneys are trying to keep from being sucked in with the multidistrict litigation in Philadelphia.
In mass tort litigation, it is often the law firms 1) who are the first to file, 2) have the most clients, and 3) are named to the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee, that have control of the litigation and will get the largest slice of the pie if a global settlement is reached.
Latecomers, such as the law firm that filed the suit in Tampa, are trying to keep the case in state court so they can retain control of the litigation, potentially be the bellwether case, and hopefully get a huge verdict/settlement that they don’t have to share with 30 plus law firms involved in the MDL.
Despite naming the teams as defendants, I still don’t think it will keep the case from being transferred to Philadelphia. The NFL is currently in the process of trying to get the case consolidated with the multi-district litigation. The parties will follow the same procedures that occurred in Dave Duerson’s case – the NFL has removed the case to federal court and filed a motion to stay; the plaintiffs will file a motion to remand, and the federal judge in Florida will likely determine that federal jurisdiction is present based upon Section 301 of the LMRA; and then the Panel on MDL will also likely rule that this case shares common questions of fact and law just like the other 100 plus lawsuits pending in Philadelphia.
It is also telling that the defendant-teams are represented by the same law firm as the NFL: Paul, Weiss LLP. This may indicate a special type of fee arrangement is already in place where the NFL and owners are splitting the legal fees for the concussion litigation.
Should the NFLPA also be named as a defendant?
The NFLPA is certainly in the crosshairs of at least one of the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee members, Hausfeld LLP. Michael Hausfeld was the lead attorney in the lawsuit against the NFLPA regarding its alleged breached of fiduciary duties owed to retirees. See Carl Eller v. NFLPA. The case is currently on appeal in the 8th Cir after a district court judge dismissed the case, holding that the retirees were not owed any fiduciary duties.
Hausfeld recently penned a piece for CLR arguing that the NFLPA was just as culpable as the NFL when it came to player safety and engaging in fraud. However, according to one source, “the Exec Committee is averse to naming the NFLPA.” Plus, it would probably bolster the argument that the litigation is “fundamentally a labor dispute.”
Hausfeld’s article, though not explicitly, raises some interesting questions that probably won’t be answered until discovery or until someone decides to sue the NFLPA. Wasn’t the NFLPA privy to the same independent scientific information relating to the long-term effects of repeated blows to the head? Why didn’t the NFLPA adopt such studies and bring it to the negotiating table when the CBAs were negotiated in the ‘60s, ‘70s, ‘80s, ‘90s and 2000s?
Arguably, the NFLPA’s hands are not entirely clean; it just wasn’t the one that voluntarily decided to create the MTBI Committee and allegedly engage in several years of refuting the link between concussions and long-term cognitive decline.
Another bite at the apple
In the event the lawsuits are dismissed against the NFL, the plaintiffs’ lawyers may attempt to go after the NFLPA, likely to no avail, but it may be on the radar of some attorneys. Publicly, there is nothing that shows that the NFLPA engaged in fraud or concealed such information from its players. Thus, the facts are not on the players’ side like they are in the NFL concussion litigation.
As the litigation proceeds, additional defendants may be named, which may include the teams, the NFLPA, the Retirement Board, doctors and even trainers. Nothing is off the board when it comes to strategizing the concussion litigation, if the plaintiffs can find a culpable target, it will, and should, be sued.
As each week passes, more former players jump on the concussion litigation bandwagon. More than 30% of all former players have filed a concussion-related lawsuit against the NFL.
The putative plaintiffs could reach 50% by the time the preemption issue is determined, although it appears that the soliciting of clients has digressed.
Nonetheless, there was a solid group of former players that recently filed suit. In the last two weeks, 8 complaints were filed against the NFL, which included 100-plus former players. Some of the more recognizable names include the following:
Former State Senator of Missouri, and long-time Kansas City Chiefs’ quarterback Bill Kenney. Kenney is represented by his son, William Kenney.
The family of the late Houston Antwine.
Four-time Pro Bowler and Two-time All-Pro Erik Williams.
Four-time Pro Bowler Ahman Green. Williams and Green are represented by a Mississippi law firm that continues to make it rain.
Updated: 1:35pm – Nov. 13
Dante Hall, Ellis Hobbs, Kevin Glover, Walter Rasby, Eric Warfield, Adam Schreiber and 19 others just filed suit in Miami.
This brings the total player-plaintiff pool to more than 3,870 former players, represented in 178 separate concussion-lawsuits. As always, these numbers will continue to grow.
The family of the late Houston Antwine filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the NFL. In December 2005, Antwine was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease allegedly caused by repeated blows to the head. According to the lawsuit, he spent the next six years suffering from the disease.
Antwine died in December 2011 due to complications from heart disease and apparently Alzheimer’s. His wife also died 24 hours later from lung cancer.
Antwine was a 6-time Pro Bowler and First-Team All-Pro — spending the majority of his career playing for the Boston Patriots. He played in an era when concussions were simply just “dings.” It’s likely that Antwine played through numerous concussions and experienced thousands of sub-concussive blows.
The link between repeated blows to the head and Alzheimer’s disease is heavily disputed by the scientific community. However, according to a recent study, ex-NFLers that played five seasons or more are three times more likely to die from a neurodegenerative disease.
Antwine’s family, as well as the rest of the players suing the NFL, will have a mighty burden to show the NFL’s alleged wrongful conduct caused their neurological disease.