Josh Gordon Hearing Continues Monday
-
Except one sample passed and one failed....
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
Except one sample passed and one failed....
Right, and that's why I expect it to be tossed out. But really, pick better friends, don't put yourself in that position. Have another record breaking year. Sign a 6 year extension worth $90m. Get to more pro-bowls. Win a superbowl. Retire to Denver. By a weed farm. Have a permanent bonfire. Visit the HoF. Stay stoned for life. Never get glaucoma.
-
And become high times man of year by lobbying for the legalization and getting it passed
-
Except one sample passed and one failed....
Right, and that's why I expect it to be tossed out. But really, pick better friends, don't put yourself in that position. Have another record breaking year. Sign a 6 year extension worth $90m. Get to more pro-bowls. Win a superbowl. Retire to Denver. By a weed farm. Have a permanent bonfire. Visit the HoF. Stay stoned for life. Never get glaucoma.
Right, and that's why I expect it to be tossed out. But really, pick better friends, don't put yourself in that position. Have another record breaking year. Sign a 6 year extension worth $90m. Get to more pro-bowls. Win a superbowl. Retire to Denver. By a weed farm. Have a permanent bonfire. Visit the HoF. Stay stoned for life. Never get glaucoma.
^^^ as they said LOL, and I think that's what we're all saying. Gordon is for sure (assuming he wins, and the longer it drags on, the more likely) the Browns are going to put him into weekly counseling sessions. Twas pointed out on one of the other boards- if a year long ban was forthcoming- Gordon's lawyers would have been screaming about the foot dragging- which would mess up next year for Josh. Also the inside dope is (supposedly) the legal team hit it out of the park blowing up the testing protocol and the results. Basically said, you suspend him for a year, we go to court, get an injunction, and we're in all likelihood going to win. Goodell and the NFL do not want that scenario under any circumstances.
Everyone- Goodell, Farmer, & Pettine have to tell him in no uncertain terms- this is absolutely, positively your last chance Josh- don't screw it up.
-
This is a repost. Long, yet interesting, read....
From the OBR watercooler. I found it interesting if true.
Very interesting legal analysis by Cedric Hopkins.
Cedric Hopkins
I attended the University of New Mexico and played basketball for the Lobos. After back-packing in Europe for a spell, I decided to attend law school. After graduation, I worked for a small firm in San Diego, CA then moved to Tucson where I opened my law practice, The Hopkins Law Office, P.C. I specialize in writing appeals in criminal and civil matters at the state and federal level.
For years, I have researched and written about legal issues but maintained a love for sports. With FieldandCourt.com, I am combining my two passions and researching and writing about sports. When I'm not in court arguing my case before a judge, I'll be doing the same with my articles on FieldandCourt.com.
What to expect if Gordon loses his appeal
"Within hours of losing his appeal (which, of course, I’m assuming he does for purposes of this article) Gordon will file a lawsuit with the clerk of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, the state court in Cleveland, Ohio.Simultaneously with filing a civil suit, Gordon will file a request for a temporary restraining order against the NFL. No, this isn’t what your crazy ex-girlfriend filed against you for calling her too much.
Gordon’s request for a temporary restraining order (or, TRO) will ask the Ohio judge to stop (or restrain) the NFL from enforcing his suspension. If you recall, the TRO in the StarCaps case (that was later turned into an injunction, which is basically the same thing) allowed the Kevin and Pat Williams to play for two complete seasons. They played the 2009 and 2010 seasons while their case was pending in the court system."
"The tougher challenge Gordon faces is showing that he is entitled to relief. I think he is, based on Ohio law.
The strongest claim Gordon will argue is that under Ohio law (but using the NFL’s cutoff levels) he did not test positive for marijuana or, more accurately, THC metabolites.
As I’m sure you know by now, the NFL divides a player’s urine into two bottles: bottles “A” and “B.” If bottle “A” is positive for the THC metabolite, then bottle “B” is used to confirm what was in bottle "A."
According to Section I
(3)(e) of the NFL's Substance Abuse Policy, as long as bottle “B” contains the THC metabolite (at any level), then the sample is considered positive and the player is subject to the league’s discipline.
Ohio law differs.
Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” If the NFL is bound by Ohio law, Gordon’s confirmatory test was negative. Hence, he did not test positive for marijuana as claimed by the NFL."
"Again, Ohio law says that both the initial drug test and the confirmation test must be positive. Or, as Ohio wrote its law, if either of the specimens are negative then the employer is obligated to report the result as negative.
The NFL will attempt to circumvent Ohio law by arguing only federal law applies to the Collective Bargaining Agreement and Substance Abuse Policy. This is a preemption doctrine that will effectively wipe out Gordon's state-law claims. The NFL attempted this argument against Kevin and Pat Williams in the StarCaps case and lost.
Federal courts have already found that the NFL is an employer of each NFL player and therefore is bound by the state laws where that player is employed. So Ohio courts should ultimately decide the case and Ohio law should control the outcome of the case.
And in Gordon’s case, once the confirmation test showed Gordon was under his employer’s threshold amount for marijuana, the test was “negative” under state law. The NFL found otherwise, contradicting state law."
"Because Gordon has such a solid case against the NFL based on the Ohio drug-testing laws, I believe his TRO will be granted and he will play in the 2014 season. This is all assuming he loses his appeal, which he shouldn’t. "Two things that will define you: Your determination when you have nothing. Your attitude when you have everything. - Mike McCartney -
Except one sample passed and one failed....
Right, and that's why I expect it to be tossed out. But really, pick better friends, don't put yourself in that position. Have another record breaking year. Sign a 6 year extension worth $90m. Get to more pro-bowls. Win a superbowl. Retire to Denver. By a weed farm. Have a permanent bonfire. Visit the HoF. Stay stoned for life. Never get glaucoma.
Right, and that's why I expect it to be tossed out. But really, pick better friends, don't put yourself in that position. Have another record breaking year. Sign a 6 year extension worth $90m. Get to more pro-bowls. Win a superbowl. Retire to Denver. By a weed farm. Have a permanent bonfire. Visit the HoF. Stay stoned for life. Never get glaucoma.
^this
-
This is a repost. Long, yet interesting, read....
From the OBR watercooler. I found it interesting if true.
Very interesting legal analysis by Cedric Hopkins.
Cedric Hopkins
I attended the University of New Mexico and played basketball for the Lobos. After back-packing in Europe for a spell, I decided to attend law school. After graduation, I worked for a small firm in San Diego, CA then moved to Tucson where I opened my law practice, The Hopkins Law Office, P.C. I specialize in writing appeals in criminal and civil matters at the state and federal level.
For years, I have researched and written about legal issues but maintained a love for sports. With FieldandCourt.com, I am combining my two passions and researching and writing about sports. When I'm not in court arguing my case before a judge, I'll be doing the same with my articles on FieldandCourt.com.
What to expect if Gordon loses his appeal
"Within hours of losing his appeal (which, of course, I’m assuming he does for purposes of this article) Gordon will file a lawsuit with the clerk of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, the state court in Cleveland, Ohio.Simultaneously with filing a civil suit, Gordon will file a request for a temporary restraining order against the NFL. No, this isn’t what your crazy ex-girlfriend filed against you for calling her too much.
Gordon’s request for a temporary restraining order (or, TRO) will ask the Ohio judge to stop (or restrain) the NFL from enforcing his suspension. If you recall, the TRO in the StarCaps case (that was later turned into an injunction, which is basically the same thing) allowed the Kevin and Pat Williams to play for two complete seasons. They played the 2009 and 2010 seasons while their case was pending in the court system."
"The tougher challenge Gordon faces is showing that he is entitled to relief. I think he is, based on Ohio law.
The strongest claim Gordon will argue is that under Ohio law (but using the NFL’s cutoff levels) he did not test positive for marijuana or, more accurately, THC metabolites.
As I’m sure you know by now, the NFL divides a player’s urine into two bottles: bottles “A” and “B.” If bottle “A” is positive for the THC metabolite, then bottle “B” is used to confirm what was in bottle "A."
According to Section I(3)(e) of the NFL's Substance Abuse Policy, as long as bottle “B” contains the THC metabolite (at any level), then the sample is considered positive and the player is subject to the league’s discipline.
Ohio law differs.
Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” If the NFL is bound by Ohio law, Gordon’s confirmatory test was negative. Hence, he did not test positive for marijuana as claimed by the NFL."
"Again, Ohio law says that both the initial drug test and the confirmation test must be positive. Or, as Ohio wrote its law, if either of the specimens are negative then the employer is obligated to report the result as negative.
The NFL will attempt to circumvent Ohio law by arguing only federal law applies to the Collective Bargaining Agreement and Substance Abuse Policy. This is a preemption doctrine that will effectively wipe out Gordon's state-law claims. The NFL attempted this argument against Kevin and Pat Williams in the StarCaps case and lost.
Federal courts have already found that the NFL is an employer of each NFL player and therefore is bound by the state laws where that player is employed. So Ohio courts should ultimately decide the case and Ohio law should control the outcome of the case.
And in Gordon’s case, once the confirmation test showed Gordon was under his employer’s threshold amount for marijuana, the test was “negative” under state law. The NFL found otherwise, contradicting state law."
"Because Gordon has such a solid case against the NFL based on the Ohio drug-testing laws, I believe his TRO will be granted and he will play in the 2014 season. This is all assuming he loses his appeal, which he shouldn’t. "This is a repost. Long, yet interesting, read....From the OBR watercooler. I found it interesting if true.
Very interesting legal analysis by Cedric Hopkins.
Cedric Hopkins
I attended the University of New Mexico and played basketball for the Lobos. After back-packing in Europe for a spell, I decided to attend law school. After graduation, I worked for a small firm in San Diego, CA then moved to Tucson where I opened my law practice, The Hopkins Law Office, P.C. I specialize in writing appeals in criminal and civil matters at the state and federal level.
For years, I have researched and written about legal issues but maintained a love for sports. With FieldandCourt.com, I am combining my two passions and researching and writing about sports. When I'm not in court arguing my case before a judge, I'll be doing the same with my articles on FieldandCourt.com.
What to expect if Gordon loses his appeal
"Within hours of losing his appeal (which, of course, I’m assuming he does for purposes of this article) Gordon will file a lawsuit with the clerk of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, the state court in Cleveland, Ohio.Simultaneously with filing a civil suit, Gordon will file a request for a temporary restraining order against the NFL. No, this isn’t what your crazy ex-girlfriend filed against you for calling her too much.
Gordon’s request for a temporary restraining order (or, TRO) will ask the Ohio judge to stop (or restrain) the NFL from enforcing his suspension. If you recall, the TRO in the StarCaps case (that was later turned into an injunction, which is basically the same thing) allowed the Kevin and Pat Williams to play for two complete seasons. They played the 2009 and 2010 seasons while their case was pending in the court system."
"The tougher challenge Gordon faces is showing that he is entitled to relief. I think he is, based on Ohio law.
The strongest claim Gordon will argue is that under Ohio law (but using the NFL’s cutoff levels) he did not test positive for marijuana or, more accurately, THC metabolites.
As I’m sure you know by now, the NFL divides a player’s urine into two bottles: bottles “A” and “B.” If bottle “A” is positive for the THC metabolite, then bottle “B” is used to confirm what was in bottle "A."
According to Section I
(3)(e) of the NFL's Substance Abuse Policy, as long as bottle “B” contains the THC metabolite (at any level), then the sample is considered positive and the player is subject to the league’s discipline.Ohio law differs.
Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” If the NFL is bound by Ohio law, Gordon’s confirmatory test was negative. Hence, he did not test positive for marijuana as claimed by the NFL."
"Again, Ohio law says that both the initial drug test and the confirmation test must be positive. Or, as Ohio wrote its law, if either of the specimens are negative then the employer is obligated to report the result as negative.
The NFL will attempt to circumvent Ohio law by arguing only federal law applies to the Collective Bargaining Agreement and Substance Abuse Policy. This is a preemption doctrine that will effectively wipe out Gordon's state-law claims. The NFL attempted this argument against Kevin and Pat Williams in the StarCaps case and lost.
Federal courts have already found that the NFL is an employer of each NFL player and therefore is bound by the state laws where that player is employed. So Ohio courts should ultimately decide the case and Ohio law should control the outcome of the case.
And in Gordon’s case, once the confirmation test showed Gordon was under his employer’s threshold amount for marijuana, the test was “negative” under state law. The NFL found otherwise, contradicting state law."
"Because Gordon has such a solid case against the NFL based on the Ohio drug-testing laws, I believe his TRO will be granted and he will play in the 2014 season. This is all assuming he loses his appeal, which he shouldn’t. "
This is quickly turning into a Hollywood movie.
-
This is a repost. Long, yet interesting, read....
From the OBR watercooler. I found it interesting if true.
Very interesting legal analysis by Cedric Hopkins.
Cedric Hopkins
I attended the University of New Mexico and played basketball for the Lobos. After back-packing in Europe for a spell, I decided to attend law school. After graduation, I worked for a small firm in San Diego, CA then moved to Tucson where I opened my law practice, The Hopkins Law Office, P.C. I specialize in writing appeals in criminal and civil matters at the state and federal level.
For years, I have researched and written about legal issues but maintained a love for sports. With FieldandCourt.com, I am combining my two passions and researching and writing about sports. When I'm not in court arguing my case before a judge, I'll be doing the same with my articles on FieldandCourt.com.
What to expect if Gordon loses his appeal
"Within hours of losing his appeal (which, of course, I’m assuming he does for purposes of this article) Gordon will file a lawsuit with the clerk of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, the state court in Cleveland, Ohio.Simultaneously with filing a civil suit, Gordon will file a request for a temporary restraining order against the NFL. No, this isn’t what your crazy ex-girlfriend filed against you for calling her too much.
Gordon’s request for a temporary restraining order (or, TRO) will ask the Ohio judge to stop (or restrain) the NFL from enforcing his suspension. If you recall, the TRO in the StarCaps case (that was later turned into an injunction, which is basically the same thing) allowed the Kevin and Pat Williams to play for two complete seasons. They played the 2009 and 2010 seasons while their case was pending in the court system."
"The tougher challenge Gordon faces is showing that he is entitled to relief. I think he is, based on Ohio law.
The strongest claim Gordon will argue is that under Ohio law (but using the NFL’s cutoff levels) he did not test positive for marijuana or, more accurately, THC metabolites.
As I’m sure you know by now, the NFL divides a player’s urine into two bottles: bottles “A” and “B.” If bottle “A” is positive for the THC metabolite, then bottle “B” is used to confirm what was in bottle "A."
According to Section I
(3)(e) of the NFL's Substance Abuse Policy, as long as bottle “B” contains the THC metabolite (at any level), then the sample is considered positive and the player is subject to the league’s discipline.Ohio law differs.
Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” If the NFL is bound by Ohio law, Gordon’s confirmatory test was negative. Hence, he did not test positive for marijuana as claimed by the NFL."
"Again, Ohio law says that both the initial drug test and the confirmation test must be positive. Or, as Ohio wrote its law, if either of the specimens are negative then the employer is obligated to report the result as negative.
The NFL will attempt to circumvent Ohio law by arguing only federal law applies to the Collective Bargaining Agreement and Substance Abuse Policy. This is a preemption doctrine that will effectively wipe out Gordon's state-law claims. The NFL attempted this argument against Kevin and Pat Williams in the StarCaps case and lost.
Federal courts have already found that the NFL is an employer of each NFL player and therefore is bound by the state laws where that player is employed. So Ohio courts should ultimately decide the case and Ohio law should control the outcome of the case.
And in Gordon’s case, once the confirmation test showed Gordon was under his employer’s threshold amount for marijuana, the test was “negative” under state law. The NFL found otherwise, contradicting state law."
"Because Gordon has such a solid case against the NFL based on the Ohio drug-testing laws, I believe his TRO will be granted and he will play in the 2014 season. This is all assuming he loses his appeal, which he shouldn’t. "
This is quickly turning into a Hollywood movie.
This is quickly turning into a Hollywood movie.
If Gordon wins the appeal and helps lead the Browns to the playoffs, it should be made into a movie.
-
This is quickly turning into a Hollywood movie.
If Gordon wins the appeal and helps lead the Browns to the playoffs, it should be made into a movie.
-
Except one sample passed and one failed....
This. The law in Ohio for employer drug testing says that both samples have to test positive for a failure to be reported.
WADA tests this way with a 150 ng/ml
Nevada and California Sanctioning Bodies test this way with 50 ng/ml
The NFL tests at 15 ng/ml of which Gordon's average was less than 15.
The bottles are arbitrarily labeled, and if the B had been labeled A, then he would have tested negative.
And the B bottle, under NFL guidelines, doesn't have to confirm a positive result, it just has to confirm that the same substance is in the sample.
So whether he failed by the rules of the NFL or not, the argument is that the rules of the NFL are cracked.
-
Except one sample passed and one failed....
Right, and that's why I expect it to be tossed out. But really, pick better friends, don't put yourself in that position. Have another record breaking year. Sign a 6 year extension worth $90m. Get to more pro-bowls. Win a superbowl. Retire to Denver. By a weed farm. Have a permanent bonfire. Visit the HoF. Stay stoned for life. Never get glaucoma.
Right, and that's why I expect it to be tossed out. But really, pick better friends, don't put yourself in that position. Have another record breaking year. Sign a 6 year extension worth $90m. Get to more pro-bowls. Win a superbowl. Retire to Denver. By a weed farm. Have a permanent bonfire. Visit the HoF. Stay stoned for life. Never get glaucoma.
Lets put this in perspective.
You grow up with childhood friends, who remain your friends through your young 20's. You guys are thick as pea soup, peas in a pod, whatever metaphor you want to use.
And you think its just that easy to drop a lifelong BFF? If so, I don't ever want to be in a position where you are my friend. I'd be afraid that a speeding ticket would get me tossed outta your circle.
-
Right, and that's why I expect it to be tossed out. But really, pick better friends, don't put yourself in that position. Have another record breaking year. Sign a 6 year extension worth $90m. Get to more pro-bowls. Win a superbowl. Retire to Denver. By a weed farm. Have a permanent bonfire. Visit the HoF. Stay stoned for life. Never get glaucoma.
Lets put this in perspective.
You grow up with childhood friends, who remain your friends through your young 20's. You guys are thick as pea soup, peas in a pod, whatever metaphor you want to use.
And you think its just that easy to drop a lifelong BFF? If so, I don't ever want to be in a position where you are my friend. I'd be afraid that a speeding ticket would get me tossed outta your circle.
Lets put this in perspective.
You grow up with childhood friends, who remain your friends through your young 20's. You guys are thick as pea soup, peas in a pod, whatever metaphor you want to use.
And you think its just that easy to drop a lifelong BFF? If so, I don't ever want to be in a position where you are my friend. I'd be afraid that a speeding ticket would get me tossed outta your circle.
Two things. You probably have 2-3 guys like that who you can't separate from, at most. If they're that close, if they care that deeply about you, when you say "guys, I need to stay clean" then they respect you, they help you even if they're smoking anything on their own. Second, he was spending his summer in Florida, IIRC, and grew up in Houston, so how many of his bestest buddies for life were out there?
-
Lets put this in perspective.
You grow up with childhood friends, who remain your friends through your young 20's. You guys are thick as pea soup, peas in a pod, whatever metaphor you want to use.
And you think its just that easy to drop a lifelong BFF? If so, I don't ever want to be in a position where you are my friend. I'd be afraid that a speeding ticket would get me tossed outta your circle.
Two things. You probably have 2-3 guys like that who you can't separate from, at most. If they're that close, if they care that deeply about you, when you say "guys, I need to stay clean" then they respect you, they help you even if they're smoking anything on their own. Second, he was spending his summer in Florida, IIRC, and grew up in Houston, so how many of his bestest buddies for life were out there?
Two things. You probably have 2-3 guys like that who you can't separate from, at most. If they're that close, if they care that deeply about you, when you say "guys, I need to stay clean" then they respect you, they help you even if they're smoking anything on their own. Second, he was spending his summer in Florida, IIRC, and grew up in Houston, so how many of his bestest buddies for life were out there?
All of them. Gordon has enough cash to take all his buddies to Florida.
All of them. Gordon has enough cash to take all his buddies to Florida.
And in a regular caring world, you'd be correct.
But that isn't the world we live in, is it? You've got a caring guy who loves his buddies, and his buddies have stars in their eyes. They are officially an entourage.
Additionally, they are of the younger generation, and so have the "screw the man" entitlement mentality. "Screw the man, they can't tell us what to smoke. Don't worry my friend J.G., you won't detect cause we are smokin'!"
Josh loves them. They love him. But he doesn't know how to stand up to them. He's a young 20'something who's never had to stand up to anything in his life. He doesn't know how. And he doesn't want to drop all his buddies.
Should he? Yes.
Will he? Who knows.
But if you stop looking at it as black and white, and try to be understanding, just a little, you might see why he hasn't or won't.
Doesn't mean you have to like it. And doesn't mean you shouldn't expect him to reap the consequences of his actions. But vilifying him for making a perfectly reasonable choice for a caring human being... not so much.
-
I don't have anything against the man...
-
Two things. You probably have 2-3 guys like that who you can't separate from, at most. If they're that close, if they care that deeply about you, when you say "guys, I need to stay clean" then they respect you, they help you even if they're smoking anything on their own. Second, he was spending his summer in Florida, IIRC, and grew up in Houston, so how many of his bestest buddies for life were out there?
All of them. Gordon has enough cash to take all his buddies to Florida.
All of them. Gordon has enough cash to take all his buddies to Florida.
And in a regular caring world, you'd be correct.
But that isn't the world we live in, is it? You've got a caring guy who loves his buddies, and his buddies have stars in their eyes. They are officially an entourage.
Additionally, they are of the younger generation, and so have the "screw the man" entitlement mentality. "Screw the man, they can't tell us what to smoke. Don't worry my friend J.G., you won't detect cause we are smokin'!"
Josh loves them. They love him. But he doesn't know how to stand up to them. He's a young 20'something who's never had to stand up to anything in his life. He doesn't know how. And he doesn't want to drop all his buddies.
Should he? Yes.
Will he? Who knows.
But if you stop looking at it as black and white, and try to be understanding, just a little, you might see why he hasn't or won't.
Doesn't mean you have to like it. And doesn't mean you shouldn't expect him to reap the consequences of his actions. But vilifying him for making a perfectly reasonable choice for a caring human being... not so much.
All of them. Gordon has enough cash to take all his buddies to Florida.
All of them. Gordon has enough cash to take all his buddies to Florida.
And in a regular caring world, you'd be correct.
But that isn't the world we live in, is it? You've got a caring guy who loves his buddies, and his buddies have stars in their eyes. They are officially an entourage.
Additionally, they are of the younger generation, and so have the "screw the man" entitlement mentality. "Screw the man, they can't tell us what to smoke. Don't worry my friend J.G., you won't detect cause we are smokin'!"
Josh loves them. They love him. But he doesn't know how to stand up to them. He's a young 20'something who's never had to stand up to anything in his life. He doesn't know how. And he doesn't want to drop all his buddies.
Should he? Yes.
Will he? Who knows.
But if you stop looking at it as black and white, and try to be understanding, just a little, you might see why he hasn't or won't.
Doesn't mean you have to like it. And doesn't mean you shouldn't expect him to reap the consequences of his actions. But vilifying him for making a perfectly reasonable choice for a caring human being... not so much.
Well said....
As I have wrote previously on this topic, he may be a complete bonehead, but he is OUR bonehead. And he's a human being, not an object for us to project our DISTANT fan based expecations upon, particularly with how little we actually know of Josh Gordon the MAN.
-
well after reading he had passed 70+ piss tests before this 'questionable' one, it showed him in a different light for me. not as bad a problem or as dumb a person as i had thought.
i mean i pictured him in a puff puff pass circle with katt williams and snoop dogg.
-
The NFL has another block-buster legal issue pending with the recent announcement that the DEA will be launching an investigation into the leagues policies regarding control and dispensation of pain meds to injured players. Damage control for this potential train wreck will have their legal department putting out fires in a big way. Seems to me they would want the josh Gordon type situations cleaned up quickly leaving the lawyers freed up to deal with the feds. again....advantage Gordon. the stars are lining up for Gordon to come out of this smelling like chronic....err roses
-
This is a repost. Long, yet interesting, read....
From the OBR watercooler. I found it interesting if true.
Very interesting legal analysis by Cedric Hopkins.
Cedric Hopkins
I attended the University of New Mexico and played basketball for the Lobos. After back-packing in Europe for a spell, I decided to attend law school. After graduation, I worked for a small firm in San Diego, CA then moved to Tucson where I opened my law practice, The Hopkins Law Office, P.C. I specialize in writing appeals in criminal and civil matters at the state and federal level.
For years, I have researched and written about legal issues but maintained a love for sports. With FieldandCourt.com, I am combining my two passions and researching and writing about sports. When I'm not in court arguing my case before a judge, I'll be doing the same with my articles on FieldandCourt.com.
What to expect if Gordon loses his appeal
"Within hours of losing his appeal (which, of course, I’m assuming he does for purposes of this article) Gordon will file a lawsuit with the clerk of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, the state court in Cleveland, Ohio.Simultaneously with filing a civil suit, Gordon will file a request for a temporary restraining order against the NFL. No, this isn’t what your crazy ex-girlfriend filed against you for calling her too much.
Gordon’s request for a temporary restraining order (or, TRO) will ask the Ohio judge to stop (or restrain) the NFL from enforcing his suspension. If you recall, the TRO in the StarCaps case (that was later turned into an injunction, which is basically the same thing) allowed the Kevin and Pat Williams to play for two complete seasons. They played the 2009 and 2010 seasons while their case was pending in the court system."
"The tougher challenge Gordon faces is showing that he is entitled to relief. I think he is, based on Ohio law.
The strongest claim Gordon will argue is that under Ohio law (but using the NFL’s cutoff levels) he did not test positive for marijuana or, more accurately, THC metabolites.
As I’m sure you know by now, the NFL divides a player’s urine into two bottles: bottles “A” and “B.” If bottle “A” is positive for the THC metabolite, then bottle “B” is used to confirm what was in bottle "A."
According to Section I(3)(e) of the NFL's Substance Abuse Policy, as long as bottle “B” contains the THC metabolite (at any level), then the sample is considered positive and the player is subject to the league’s discipline.
Ohio law differs.
Under Ohio law (Ohio Code 123:1-76-07), only “specimens which test negative on the initial test or negative on the confirmatory test shall be reported as negative.” If the NFL is bound by Ohio law, Gordon’s confirmatory test was negative. Hence, he did not test positive for marijuana as claimed by the NFL."
"Again, Ohio law says that both the initial drug test and the confirmation test must be positive. Or, as Ohio wrote its law, if either of the specimens are negative then the employer is obligated to report the result as negative.
The NFL will attempt to circumvent Ohio law by arguing only federal law applies to the Collective Bargaining Agreement and Substance Abuse Policy. This is a preemption doctrine that will effectively wipe out Gordon's state-law claims. The NFL attempted this argument against Kevin and Pat Williams in the StarCaps case and lost.
Federal courts have already found that the NFL is an employer of each NFL player and therefore is bound by the state laws where that player is employed. So Ohio courts should ultimately decide the case and Ohio law should control the outcome of the case.
And in Gordon’s case, once the confirmation test showed Gordon was under his employer’s threshold amount for marijuana, the test was “negative” under state law. The NFL found otherwise, contradicting state law."
"Because Gordon has such a solid case against the NFL based on the Ohio drug-testing laws, I believe his TRO will be granted and he will play in the 2014 season. This is all assuming he loses his appeal, which he shouldn’t. "Very interesting legal analysis by Cedric Hopkins.
Very interesting indeed.
I'm sure the specter of a lawsuit made Roger's day...
-
Report: Browns bracing for at least a half-season without Josh Gordon
Aug 5 2014, 10:59 PMKyle Smith
As Josh Gordon awaits the results of his appeal of a possible year-long suspension resulting from a failed drug test for marijuana, the Cleveland Browns are preparing for at least a half-season without their star wide receiver.
According to a report by Cleveland.com's Mary Kay Cabot, league sources are saying the Browns are bracing for Gordon to receive at least an eight game suspension.
Should Gordon lose the appeal, he'll face a minimum one-year suspension, but there's still a possibility the two sides could hammer out a deal that would see the Pro Bowler suit up in 2014.
"As frustrating as it is for Josh, I think he's handled it well,'' head coach Mike Pettine told Cleveland.com. "He's been practicing hard, giving good effort, finishing plays. Assuming if we don't hear anything, then he'll be out there
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login