NFL files an appeal of Deflategate decision that erased Tom Brady suspension

Show Caption Hide Caption Inside Slant: Impact of Tom Brady's overturned suspension USA TODAY Sports' Tom Pelissero explains what a federal judge's decision to overturn Patriots QB Tom Brady's Deflategate suspension means for the Patriots and the rest of the NFL.

NEW YORK — A federal judge has ruled in favor of New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and the NFL Players Association in the Deflategate case, effectively vacating the Super Bowl MVP's four-game suspension.

Judge Richard M. Berman vacated the arbitration by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell in his opinion filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Berman cited three grounds in making his decision.

“The Award is premised upon several significant legal deficiencies, including (A) inadequate notice to Brady of both his potential discipline (four-game suspension) and his alleged misconduct; (B) denial of the opportunity for Brady to examine one of two lead investigators, namely NFL Executive Vice President and General Counsel Jeff Pash; and (C) denial of equal access to investigative files, including witness interview notes,” the filing read.

PDF: Read Judge Berman's decision

Brady is eligible to return to team activities immediately and to play in the season opening kickoff game against the Pittsburgh Steelers Sept. 10.

“Because there was no notice of a four-game suspension in the circumstances presented here," Berman wrote, "Commissioner Goodell may be said to have ‘dispense(d) his own brand of industrial justice.’ ”

The NFL filed an appeal of Berman’s decision on Thursday afternoon, through the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, but will not seek a stay of the decision. That means Brady will be eligible to play in next Thursday night's season opener against the Pittsburgh Steelers.

"We are grateful to Judge Berman for hearing this matter, but respectfully disagree with today’s decision," Goodell said in a statement. "We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season."

Patriots owner Robert Kraft again took the opportunity to offer a defense of Brady's character.

"As I have said during this process and throughout his Patriots career, Tom Brady is a classy person of the highest integrity," Kraft said in a statement released by the team. "He represents everything that is great about this game and this league.

"Yet, with absolutely no evidence of any actions of wrongdoing by Tom in the Wells report, the lawyers at the league still insisted on imposing and defending unwarranted and unprecedented discipline. Judge Richard Berman understood this and we are greatly appreciative of his thoughtful decision that was delivered today. Now, we can return our focus to the game on the field."

The NFL said that Goodell will not be in Foxborough, Mass., next week when the Patriots host the Steelers.

Berman’s ruling accepted the union’s argument that Brady had no notice that a “general awareness” of misconduct by others could lead to discipline. That was the basis of the original suspension levied by NFL senior vice president Troy Vincent. Goodell determined in his arbitration award that Brady had participated in “a scheme to tamper with footballs.”

“With respect to ‘general awareness’ of others’ misconduct — which is the principal finding in both the Wells Report and the Vincent Letter — Brady had no notice that such conduct was prohibited, or any reasonable certainty of potential discipline stemming from such conduct,” Berman wrote. “The Court concludes that, as a matter of law, no NFL policy or precedent notifies players that they may be disciplined (much less suspended) for general awareness of misconduct by others. And, it does not appear that the NFL has ever, prior to this case, sought to punish players for such an alleged violation.”

The NFL had argued that precedent-setting decisions like those in the case of Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson did not apply here because Goodell relied on Article 46 to uphold Brady’s suspension.

Berman rejected that argument, saying that while domestic violence incidents like those at issue in Rice and Peterson’s cases could be deemed conduct detrimental, they were disciplined under a specific policy. The judge wrote: “Goodell’s reliance on notice of broad CBA ‘conduct detrimental’ policy — as opposed to specific Player Policies regarding equipment violations — to impose discipline on Brady is legally misplaced.”

One main issue Judge Berman took with the NFL’s case was its stance that Brady’s four-game discipline should be compared to suspensions doled out for violations of the NFL’s Policy on Anabolic Steroids and Related Substances. Berman dismissed that notion.

“The Court finds that no player alleged or found to have had a general awareness of the inappropriate ball deflation activities of others or who allegedly schemed with others to let air out of footballs in a championship game and also had not cooperated in an ensuing investigation, reasonably could be on notice that their discipline would (or should) be the same as applied to a player who violated the NFL Policy on Anabolic Steroids and Related Substances,” Berman wrote. “Brady had no such notice.”

One of the NFLPA’s central claims in this case was that Pash — who had the authority to edit the Ted Wells report that was used as basis for Brady’s discipline — was not made available for testimony in Brady’s June 23 appeal. The union used that argument to make the case that the NFL overstepped its bounds in Brady’s arbitration process.

“The Court finds that Commissioner Goodell's denial of Brady's motion to compel the testimony of Mr. Pash was fundamentally unfair,” Berman wrote. “Given Mr. Pash's very senior position in the NFL, his role as Executive Vice President and General Counsel, and his designation as co-lead investigator with Ted Wells, it is logical that he would have valuable insight into the course and outcome of the Investigation and into the drafting and content of the Wells Report.”

There were additional issues Berman found with the league’s handling of information outlined in the Wells Report. Specifically, documents and interview notes taken during the investigation were not made available to Brady’s legal team before he was cross-examined by Wells.

“The interview notes were, at the very least, the basis for the Wells Report, and Brady was prejudiced by his lack of access to them,” Berman wrote.

“Brady was denied the opportunity to examine and challenge materials that may have led to his suspension and which likely facilitated Paul, Weiss attorneys' cross-examination of him."

The NFLPA released a statement earlier Thursday:

"The rights of Tom Brady and of all NFL players under the collective bargaining agreement were affirmed today by a Federal Judge in a court of the NFL’s choosing. We thank Judge Berman for his time, careful consideration of the issue and fair and just result," NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith said in a statement.

"This decision should prove, once and for all, that our Collective Bargaining Agreement does not grant this Commissioner the authority to be unfair, arbitrary and misleading. While the CBA grants the person who occupies the position of Commissioner the ability to judiciously and fairly exercise the designated power of that position, the union did not agree to attempts to unfairly, illegally exercise that power, contrary to what the NFL has repeatedly and wrongfully claimed.

"We are happy for the victory of the rule of law for our players and our fans. This court’s decision to overturn the NFL Commissioner again should signal to every NFL owner that collective bargaining is better than legal losses. Collective bargaining is a much better process that will lead to far better results."

Union president Eric Winston, who plays for the Cincinnati Bengals also released a statement which read: "I am happy for Tom, and it’s important to remember that when one player’s rights are upheld, it is a victory for all players. However, this whole ordeal has highlighted the need for players and owners to work together to make all policies fair and transparent for everyone in our game. I welcome an opportunity to have open and constructive dialogue with the league in the near future for how we can best accomplish that."

Lawyers interviewed by USA TODAY Sports before the ruling agreed the NFL would have a more difficult time obtaining a stay than Brady would have had Berman ruled against him. The party seeking a stay must show a strong likelihood of success, irreparable injury in the absence of a stay, absence of substantial injury to the party opposing the stay and the public interest.

Berman’s ruling comes three days after both parties met in court Monday in a last-ditch attempt to settle the case. Both Brady and Goodell were present for Monday’s hearing, which included a private settlement conference between both sides that lasted 41 minutes.

“I have no qualms with either party in their efforts,” Berman said Monday. “The parties tried quite hard. Sometimes, settlements just don’t happen.”

Brady's four-game suspension originated from an investigation by Wells, and NFL-appointed attorney, who that found Brady was “at least generally aware” of the alleged intentional deflation of footballs prior to January’s AFC Championship Game.

Goodell upheld Brady’s suspension July 28 in a 20-page decision, in which he stated that Brady “participated in a scheme to tamper” with the game balls in the AFC title game, based on the evidence collected by Wells.

The league had asked the court to confirm the discipline, citing language in the CBA.

***

Follow Lorenzo Reyes on Twitter @LorenzoGReyes