Rosenhaus disputed Jackson’s version of events, noting agents are permitted to give their clients loans, and those loans weren’t related to Jackson choosing Rosenhaus’ agency.

Jackson contends without the money, he wouldn’t have chosen Rosenhaus as his agent, and the later payments were given to retain Jackson as a client — which is prohibited.

Kaplan, the arbitrator, ruled in favor of Rosenhaus during the NFLPA’s in-house process. Jackson’s lawsuit, though, claims the entire process was biased.

The court filing isn’t the first time the NFLPA’s arbitration process has come under fire.

On Dec. 7, 2006, a Congressional hearing was called on the matter, with the day’s top testimony coming from linebacker LaVar Arrington.

Arrington was there on behalf of his agent, Carl Poston, who was suspended by the NFLPA for two years, even though Arrington, Poston and the Redskins had all reached mutual agreement on a disputed bonus, and none of the parties wanted to pursue disciplinary action.

Roger Kaplan arbitrated that case, as he has every NFLPA dispute the past decade.

Rep. William D. Delahunt and other legislators voiced displeasure about that arrangement.