Yesterday, the U.S Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that NFL quarterback and one-time dog abuser Michael Vick is entitled to keep some $16 million in roster bonuses from the Atlanta Falcons. The opinion is here. (HT: How Appealing) Now if only Vick’s new team, the Philadelphia Eagles, had been able to win last Sunday against Dallas . . .
David Schwartz says:
The ruling is very obviously correct on the legal issue of Vick keeping the bonus. I find it hard to believe the league was arguing in good faith. Vick’s bonus was a roster bonus, conditional only if he was on the roster as of a particular date and subject only to forfeiture provisions that didn’t apply. He was on the roster as of that date, therefore the bonus was fully earned on that date.
As far as the recusal issue, I’d say it’s obviously correct. You can’t hold onto a recusal argument for years as a “get out of jail free” card and bring it up only when you get an unfavorable ruling.
November 11, 2009, 3:27 pmDrew Cloutier says:
Wow. I cannot believe that the NFL made that recusal argument. If you are going to try to kill the king….
November 11, 2009, 4:14 pmbartman says:
one-time dog abuser Michael Vick
Isn’t that a bit like calling Ted Bundy a “one-time woman abuser” when the phrase “unrepentant mass-murderer” is far more appropriate?
November 11, 2009, 6:05 pmChrisTS says:
I believe both said they wished things had gone differently.
November 11, 2009, 7:03 pmCJColucci says:
I don’t have a dog in this fight.
November 11, 2009, 7:13 pmBT says:
Given his circumstances, I wonder how much of that roster bonus, after taxes, will go to his lawyers?
November 11, 2009, 7:35 pm