|
 If a New Jersey lawyer can only argue that NFL ticket holders have a right to “observe an honest match played,” his proposed class action against the New England Patriots for cheating is dead in the water.
Carl J. Mayer of Princeton claims to represent all those New York Jets fans who have bought tickets to their team's home games against the Patriots since Bill Belichick became the Patriots head coach in 2000. At the last game between the teams Sept. 9, a Patriots employee was caught illegally videotaping the Jets' defensive signals.
“This [conduct] violated the contractual expectations and rights of New York Jets ticket holders who fully anticipated and contracted for a ticket to observe an honest match played in compliance with all laws and regulations,” Mayer says in his federal court complaint.
The suit alleges tortious interference, fraud, deceptive business practices and racketeering and seeks, among other things, a full refund of the money paid by Jets fans to watch the eight Patriots games –- amounting to $61 million.
“On information and belief, Defendants deployed their unlawful videotape program during every game played against the Jets in Giants stadium from 2000 through 2007,” the suit says. The Jets have not beaten the Patriots at home since 2000.
Even if Mayer can prove the cheating allegations, there appears to be absolutely no precedent to support his theory that
it is a material and agreed fact, understanding and condition that [ ] NFL games are to be played honestly and to be a match of contestants following the same essential rules and conditions.
In 1999, a California appeals court said a Los Angeles Rams season ticket holder aggrieved at the team's failure to be competitive “did not buy the right to watch a good team or to have enlightened (in his opinion) management decisions made.”
“Plaintiff's recourse was to give up on the team when he felt it had given up on him,” the court added in Charpentier v. Los Angeles Rams, 75 Cal.App.4th 301. “It is common knowledge that professional sports franchisees have a sordid history of arrogant disdain for the consumers of the product.”
The New York Appellate Division, meanwhile, has found that “In this age of 'team-jumping ball players' and 'renegotiated athletic contracts,'” ticket buyers assume the risk that a star player will be traded to another team. Strauss v. Long Island Sports, 401 N.Y.S.2d 233 (1978).
From corked baseball bats to athletes pumped up on steroids, this is the age of a “culture of cheating” in pro sports. While the Patriots' videotaping may not have been “common knowledge,” reasonable NFL fans can hardly expect the games they watch to be cheating-free.
|
UPDATE
In a March 23, 2009 opinion, U.S. District Judge Garrett E. Brown dismissed the case. "Plaintiff's subjective expectations regarding how the game would be played and what decisions the respective coaches would make, right or wrong, even if these actions constituted 'cheating,' was not anything that he either received license to or contracted for," he said.
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Judge Brown in a May 19, 2010 opinion.
|
By Matthew Heller
10/1/07 
|
