Judge Rules NFL Concussion Settlement Needs More Work For Approval

A lot of press has been released over a Federal District Judge’s “rejection” of the NFL concussion settlement. The truth is that Judge Anita B. Brody did not give preliminary approval to the settlement, giving the parties leave to supply her with more information on the settlement. Although this is not the same as an outright approval, it is not as gloom and doom as most sources are making it out. In actuality, both the Plaintiffs’ representatives and lawyers for the NFL want this settlement approved. This is not the same situation we have in the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill settlement BP (see my previous blog posts on that subject).

What Judge Brody did was to ask the parties for more financial analysis and information. Her main concern was that not all retired NFL players who would qualify for the settlement would get paid. The settlement is designed to last at least 65 years.

Under the current agreement, awards would vary based on an ex-player's age and diagnosis. A younger retiree with Lou Gehrig's disease would get $5 million, those with serious dementia cases would get $3 million, and an 80-year-old with early dementia would get $25,000. Retirees without symptoms would get baseline screening and follow-up care if needed.

The proposed settlement would include $675 million for compensatory claims for players with neurological symptoms; $75 million for baseline testing for asymptomatic men; and $10 million for medical research and education. The NFL also would pay an additional $112 million to the players' lawyers for their fees and expenses, for a total payout of nearly $900 million.

Although this ruling is a setback, both sides are confident a deal can get done and approved by Judge Brody. How much, or to what extent, the agreement will need to be tweaked is unknown. The parties could show Judge Brody more financial analysis to assure her the money will last or raise the fund amount to ease her concerns. They also could try to start over.

5th Circuit Upholds BP Settlement

In a surprising decision based on its past opinions over the matter, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Judge Barbier's ruling over the BP Settlement last Friday. BP's lawyers have been arguing that the settlement is not what they agreed to and was patently unfair to their client-even though they signed off on the agreement and fully understood the ramifications of the agreement. 

At the heart of BP's argument was that in order to qualify for the settlement, a claimant must prove causation. Of course, BP's lawyers wanted the Appeals Court to use their 'new' definition of causation, not the definition of "causation" in the settlement agreement. What they wanted was for the Courts to re-interpret, and basically rewrite, the settlement agreement in BP's favor. 

The battle has been ongoing for some time and there are still other aspects of the appeal still up in the air. The latest ruling, however, is a huge victory for claimants and the Gulf Coast as a whole. For more information on the subject, click on the links below:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-11/bp-oil-spill-settlement-approval-upheld-by-u-s-appeals-court.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/11/business/energy-environment/appeals-court-upholds-oil-spill-settlement.html?_r=0

Pittman, Dutton & Hellums, P.C., is currently investigating and filing claims for those affected by the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. If your company is located in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and parts of Florida and Texas, you may be entitled to compensation. Contact Booth Samuels at 1-866-515-8880 or by email at booths@pittmandutton.com for a free case evaluation. 

NCAA Concussion Lawsuits Consolidated In MDL

Early last week, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation ordered nearly a dozen concussion-related lawsuits against the NCAA to be consolidated. All cases were sent to the Northern District of Illinois where the Arrington case has been pending for over two years. 

The JPML heard oral arguments for consolidation on December 5, 2013, in Las Vegas. A number of class action lawsuits have been filed since the Arrington case was filed, but the class definitions vary in terms of sport played, years played, and other differences. Almost all cases filed do however make claims for medical monitoring. 

In their Order, the Judges wrote, "Most of the actions now pending, however, involve nearly completely overlapping putative classes and claims." They went on to state, "Regardless of the scope of the putative classes alleged, all actions share common factual questions concerning the NCAA's knowledge of the risks of concussions in football players and its policies governing the protection of players from such injuries."

The Arrington case has been in mediation since November, and another case is set for mediation in February. It is unclear what will happen with those negotiations now that the Panel has consolidated all of these cases.