NFL Players Cry Foul over Settlement Liens

May 5th, 2016. By LucyC

Attorneys behaving badly—or is it a case of consumer fraud?—or maybe it’s all fiction to begin with. Whatever it may be, it’s certainly an interesting twist on the client-attorney relationship.

Remember the massive concussion lawsuit filed by former National Football League (NFL) footballers against the league—which recently resulted in a massive $1 billion settlement? Well, the players are now suing their attorneys over liens placed or intended to be placed on the players’ individual cuts of the settlement.

Wow. What happened to sending an invoice?

The backstory—short version—in April the $1 billion settlement was upheld against the NFL. Approved by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the revised settlement deal will resolve thousands of lawsuits brought against the league, as well as covering over 20,000 retired NFL players for the next 65 years. According to estimates by the NFL, 6,000 former players, or nearly three in 10, could develop Alzheimer’s disease or moderate dementia.

In the lawsuit filed by Gale Sayers, Lem Barney, Thomas Skladany, Thomas Vaughn, Jerry Rush, Kenneth Callicutt and Eric Hipple, (FYI—Sayers and Barney are members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame) against their former attorneys, Hausfeld; Zimmerman Reed; Locks Law Firm; Bondurant Mixson & Elmore; and Pope McGlamry, the plaintiffs have asked the court to rule that their former law firms not be entitled to liens on the players’ recovery.

The players claim they terminated their respective firms’ handling of their individual cases because they weren’t happy with the representation they were receiving. Here’s the possible consumer fraud angle—not getting the goods as advertised. But how do you measure that?

According to the lawsuit, “Defendant law firms’ efforts on ­plaintiffs’ cases have been expended exclusively in furtherance of the NFL concussion class action litigation for which some of defendant law firms will be richly compensated.”  …”But, based on information and belief, defendant law firms have made no substantive efforts in furtherance of plaintiffs’ ­individual monetary award claims under the settlement agreement, which is why plaintiffs ­terminated the relationships with the defendant firms.” In plain English—their eyes were on the big payday. Not exactly surprising.

Of course, the lawyers have a different version of events. Managing partner of Locks Law Firm, Michael Leh, said in a statement, “Locks Law Firm had not asserted an attorneys’ lien against the former player in this complaint who we represented; although we did do work on the case we would never assert a claim for fees that was not justified.”

“No law firm represents more individual former players in this litigation than we do,” he continued, “and no other firm has spent more time, effort and money than Locks Law Firm in order to obtain the maximum award possible for each of our individual clients both under the terms of the settlement agreement and through every other available avenue.”

No word from the other law firms as of yet. Don’t know if anyone will make an end-run on this one.

 

Tags: Attorney Fees, Consumer Fraud, NFL

This was posted on Thursday, May 5th, 2016 at 11:52 am and is filed under Consumer Fraud . Feel free to respond, or trackback. Read our comments policy.