League, NFLPA return to court Friday

ST. LOUIS -- The NFL and players suing the league on antitrust grounds return to the courtroom Friday. The latest -- and perhaps most significant -- legal proceeding could help determine the direction of talks aimed at reaching a new collective-bargaining agreement.

Friday, a three-judge panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments from the league and the players in the NFL's appeal of an April 28 ruling that granted an injunction and briefly lifted the league's nearly three-month lockout.

Thursday, commissioner Roger Goodell, NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith and key negotiators for both sides met near Chicago for this week's third day of mediated talks.

It appears both sides were willing to speak directly, with mediator Judge Arthur Boylan on hand for the discussions. Among the owners participating were John Mara (Giants), Jerry Jones (Cowboys), Bob Kraft (Patriots) and Jerry Richardson (Panthers).

No immediate breakthroughs were expected, and a person who has been briefed on the discussions said no major new proposals were exchanged Thursday.

Boylan canceled mediation sessions scheduled for next Tuesday and Wednesday in Minneapolis, but the sides might continue discussions elsewhere.

According to a joint statement released by the NFL and NFLPA: "Owners and players were engaged in confidential discussions before Chief Magistrate Judge Boylan. The court has ordered continued confidentiality of the mediation sessions.''

Both sides believe they will gain a major tactical advantage in talks if the decision goes their way. Most legal experts believe the league will prevail based on a previous ruling from the Eighth Circuit.

"I think the owners go into with a slight advantage, simply because the stay ruling harshly rebuked Judge [Susan] Nelson and had serious doubts as to her interpretation," said University of Pennsylvania Law Professor Andrew Brandt, a former contract negotiator with the Packers. "Having said that, the players only need to convince one of the two judges to come to the other side."

The judges offered a narrow ruling on the NFL's contention that Nelson's decision violated the 1932 Norris-LaGuardia Act, which stipulates that federal judges cannot issue injunctions in a labor dispute. The players' attorneys have argued it's no longer a labor dispute because the NFLPA decertified as a union March 11, a day before the lockout began. Nelson agreed, but the appeals court ruled otherwise.

"This is really the same theme we've had since March 11,'' Brandt said. "The players have argued that this is a move from negotiation to litigation, and that no one can force them to have a labor relationship, and that it's now an antitrust matter."

University of Tulane Sports Law professor Gabe Feldman said the players "have a real uphill battle to get one of the two judges to change their mind." But Feldman said the appeals court could alter the landscape of negotiations if it rules more broadly on the appeal.

"If the court wants to send a message to the parties, they could rule more broadly, and not just address the Norris-LaGuardia Act," Feldman said. "We'll have some indication as to which way they're leaning in the oral arguments based on the questions they ask."

Even if the court rules only on Norris-LaGuardia, that could give the players an advantage.

"What could be particularly tricky is if the panel only addresses the Norris-LaGuardia Act," Feldman said. "The players could maintain some leverage because their antitrust claims could have some validity. The lockout might still be an antitrust violation that could give the players damages, so it puts pressure and risk on both sides."