On Tuesday September 8, 2015, a federal district judge denied a motion filed on behalf of the NFL Players’ Association, which attempted to reopen the long-running “Reggie White” case. Ending in 1993 with a settlement agreement, the Reggie White case was a class action antitrust lawsuit against the NFL. The settlement ultimately led to the league’s current unrestricted free agent system.
However, the CBA agreement arising from the White settlement was not renewed, and it expired in 2011. This subsequently led to a lockout of the players and new CBA negotiations.
Through the new negotiations, the NFLPA agreed to a stipulation of dismissal, which barred the union from continuing any antitrust claims arising from an alleged breach of the 1993 White settlement. Yet, the recent motion claimed that the NFL “coerced [the NFLPA] to agree to the [stipulation] because the players had no practical choice but to agree to the [stipulation] on the NFL’s terms in order to end the lockout.” The papers also alleged that the league set a secret salary cap with owners over the course of the CBA negotiations in 2010.
Nevertheless, Judge Michael Davis denied the motion to reopen the case. He explained that, through competent legal counsel, the NFLPA agreed to the stipulation with knowledge that it was releasing the NFL from any claims against the league unknown to the NFLPA at that time—including any antitrust or collusion claims. Therefore, the judge concluded that “belated regret over that decision is not a basis for relief.”