from Doev. NFL (MD GA.)submitted yesterday:
That claim is that I am quite confident and I don’t go anywhere. (Assertion of the “intentional effect of emotional distress” based on extreme and outrageous behavior is actually feasible in some circumstances, but generally requires very awful behavior targeting a particular plaintiff.)
The DOE also alleges violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act (“conspiracy between NFL teams influenced the drafting process, and subsequent selection of Sheddur Sanders constitutes a conspiracy to curb trade within the league and limit competition”) and the federal anti-discrimination law (“decisions made regarding the Thunder could have been influenced by racism.”
But of course, he has no position to challenge allegations of harm to Sanders. The DOE also argues that “the NFL may have engaged in unfair practices by misrepresenting the nature of the draft process and the qualifications of players.”
The plaintiffs are seeking “formal approval from the NFL regarding the emotional distress caused by their actions and statements,” and “retract and apologise for the defamatory statement made about Chedure Sanders.”[i]$100 million for harm caused by “punitive damages” in the drafting process, suppressing fairer practices. [Doe] And the impact of NFL actions on his emotional well-being. ”
The plaintiff states that he cannot pay the application fee, so the court is I’ll screen Determining whether it is “frivolous” (among other things) means “uncontroversial in law or in fact.” I hope that the court will in fact dismiss it as frivolous and promptly.
Update: Professor Andy Geronimo (Case Western) Tweet: “Is that so? [intentional infliction of emotional distress] The claim that you must now be a Cleveland Browns fan to see your favourite college player fall into the fifth round of the draft. [plausible]. ”
