On Monday, December 21, 2015, all 32 NFL teams responded with a joint motion in support of tossing a proposed class action lawsuit filed by a number of former footballers. The suit sprung out of the wanton distribution of painkillers by medical staff without regards to possible long-term effects on the health of the players, according to the plaintiffs in the case.
In their joint motion, the teams’ main argument is that the case should be dismissed because the ex-players’ claims are preempted and time barred. They argue that the collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) governing the League throughout the course of the players’ individual careers preempts any state law claims and that the players were all well aware of their injuries more than three years ago, when the last player retired, which is outside the statute of limitations at issue.
The teams further allege that the claims made in this case are indistinguishable from Dent, et al. v. NFL, which was a similar case involving improper distribution of painkillers that was dismissed last year and made up of members of the same current proposed class.
In the present case, which was filed this past May, the plaintiffs claim the NFL gave them massive amounts of painkillers and other medications to try to get the players back into games as quickly as possible. This practice was improper and illegal, and didn’t allow the players time to properly recover from football injuries, which tend to be extremely devastating on the body.
In support of their motion to dismiss, the teams argue that the CBAs preempt the state law claims because the court would be required to interpret specific contract provisions of the agreements, which they do not have authority to do. The specific provisions include: teams’ duty to have doctors and trainers on staff as medical personnel; the players’ right to second, outside medical opinion regarding injuries and recovery options; players’ access to their medical records; and players’ obligation to accurately disclose their symptoms to team doctors and staff. The Labor-Management Relations Act, the teams state, preempts interpretation of these provisions, which is the same reasoning behind the dismissal of the Dent action.