BOYD et al v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE et al

Filing 1

COMPLAINT against NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, NFL PROPERTIES LLC ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 055871.), filed by MACARTHUR LANE, MARK COOPER, BRAD JACKSON, ROBERT BELL, CHARLES ANTHONY, CLIFF HARRIS, MARVIN WOODSON, PAUL KRAUSE, NOEL JENKE, CHARLES MYRTLE, CEDRICK HARDMAN, BRUCE LAIRD, JOE DELAMIELLEURE, DON HORN, DENNIS HARRAH, JAMES WILLIAMS, MARK KONAR, TOMMY NOBIS, JAMES JONES, CALVIN JACKSON, TROY JOHNSON, MICHAEL MORTON, PETER LAZETICH, CALEB MILLER, JOSEPH KAPP, MICHAEL WEDDINGTON, HARVEY ARMSTRONG, DERLAND MOORE, MICHAEL MERRIWEATHER, JAMES HARRELL, AARON JONES, II, KENNETH EASLEY, JR, ESTATE OF GREGORY LENS, RICK SANFORD, WILLIAM "BILLY&quo SHIELDS, GARY PADJEN, CHARLES KRUEGER, PHIL VILLAPIANO, KEN FANTETTI, DONNIE GREEN, LEON "RAY" JARVIS, EDWARD WHITE, JOE FERGUSON, JR, LARRY WOODS, DONALD MACEK, JEFF BARNES, CHARLIE SMITH, LEE FOLKINS, DERRICK GAFFNEY, AUGUST "GUS" OTTO, PHILLIP FREEMAN, III, OLRICK JOHNSON, JR, WILLIE GREEN, JAMES HOUGH, CHARLEY HARRAWAY, THOMAS BEER, JAMES GARCIA, FRED FORSBERG, TERRANCE "TERRY&quo METCALF, BOBBY HARDEN, JR, DENNIS MCKNIGHT, ALFRED GROSS, GENE LANG, LEMUEL BARNEY, BRENT BOYD, DELLES HOWELL, JERRY ROBINSON, WILLIAM "BILL" CODY, VICTOR HICKS, ARTHUR STILL, REGINALD CLARK, CRAIG CURRY, DONALD MANOUKIAN, MARK NICHOLS, JEFF MCINTYRE, DAVID RECHER, LEONARD "BUBBA&quo MCDOWELL, JR, MIKE WOOD, TERRY OWENS, CLARENCE VERDIN, BRYAN STOLENBERG, ROD MARTIN, ROBERT KROLL, KEITH NORD, MICHAEL "TONY" DAVIS, CONRAD DOBLER, MELVIN CARVER, MIKE AUGUSTYNIAK, TRUMAINE JOHNSON, FRED SMERLAS, RANDY RAGON, MARGENE ADKINS, NEAL CRAIG, WILLIAM "BILLY&quo TRUAX, KORY MINOR, J. BRUCE JARVIS, LIONEL ANTOINE, STEVE JONES, PETER CRONAN, IRA MATTHEWS, III, MARK COTNEY, JEFFREY WALKER, MERVIN KRAKAU, JON MELANDER, LARRY WEBSTER, FRED ANDERSON. (Attachments: # 1 complaint, # 2 complaint, # 3 complaint, # 4 complaint, # 5 complaint, # 6 complaint, # 7 complaint, # 8 complaint, # 9 complaint, # 10 complaint, # 11 complaint, # 12 complaint, # 13 complaint, # 14 complaint, # 15 complaint, # 16 complaint, # 17 complaint, # 18 complaint, # 19 Civil Cover Sheet)(mima, )

sports without experiencing any problem of this type and there continues to be
considerable debate within the medical community on the precise long-term effects of
concussions and how they relate to other risk factors." (Emphasis added). He neglected to
mention that the debate was principally between the scientists in the pay of the League and
scientists operating independently of the League.

163.

The disingenuous nature of the NFL position was exposed in September

10,2009, when the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research published a study of
retired NFL players commissioned by the NFL Player Care Foundation. The study found that
retired NFL players are diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease or similar medical conditions far
more often than the national population-including arate of 19 times the normal incidence for
men aged 30 through 49.

164.

Despite these findings from a study that the League sponsored, the NFL

continued to deny publicly any link between concussions on the playing field and dementia. A
September 29,2009 New York Times article reported as follows:

An N.F.L. spokesman, Greg Aiello, said in an e-mail
message that the study did not formally diagnose
dementia, that it was subject to shortcomings of
telephone surveys and that "there are thousands of
retired players who do not have memory problems.'n
ooMemory

disorders affect many people who never played
football or other sports," Mr. Aiello said. "Vy'e are trying
to understand it as it relates to our retired players."

As scrutiny of brain injuries in football players has
escalated the past three years, with prominent
professionals reporting cognitive problems and academic
studies supporting a link more generally, the N.F.L. and
its medical committee on concussions have steadfastly
denied the existence of reliable data on the issue. The
league pledged to pursue its own studies, including the
one at the University of Michigan.
60

Dr. Ira

Casson, a co-chairman of the concussions
committee who has been the league's primary voice
denying any evidence connecting N.F.L. football and
dementia, said: "What I take from this report is
there's a need for further studies to see whether or
not this finding is going to pan out, if it's really there
or not. I can see that the respondents believe they
have been diagnosed. But the next step is to determine
whether that is so."
The N.F.L. is conducting its own rigorous study of 120
retired players, with results expected within a few years.
All neurological examinations are being conducted by
Dr. Casson. (Emphases added).

165. After the publication of the University of Michigan study, the House
Judiciary Committee commenced an inquiry into "Legal Issues Relating To Football Head

Injuries" and held its first hearing on October 28,2009. Representative John Conyers
("Conyers") summarized the evidence:

There appears to be growing evidence that playing
football may be linked to long-term brain damage. For
example, a 2003 University of North Carolina study
found that professional players who suffered multiple
concussions were three times more likely to suffer
clinical depression than the general population. A followup study in 2005 showed NFL players suffering

concussions had five times the rate of cognitive
impairment. And retired players were 37 percent more
likely to suffer from Alzheimer's than the population as a
whole. Earlier this year, the University of Michigan
released a study that found that 6.1 percent of NFL
players over 50 years ofage reported they had received a
dementia-related diagnosis-a statistic five times higher
than the national average. Players age 30 through 49
showed a rate of 1.9 percent of dementia-related
diagnosis 19 times that of the national average.
{<**d.

The National Football League is performing its own
long-term study, and has largely sought to discredit
these reports or some of the conclusions drawn from

6l

some of these reports. The football league described
the reports as flawed.

Dr. Ira

Casson, the co-chair of the NFL's Mild
Traumatic Brain Injury Committee, denied the
linkage on six separate occasions. When asked
whether there was any linkage between playing
football and CTE, Dr. Casson stated that it has never
been scientifically, validly documented. The league
said the recent University of Michigan study was
flawed and that further study was necessary.The New
York Times data released last week, was, they said, for
self-promotional and lobbying purposes of the union.
Given there is no consensus between the league and its
players and the medical community about the causes of
these cognitive disorders, it should come as no surprise
there is little agreement about how to respond.
(Emphases added).

166.

Representative Linda Sanchez ("Sanchez"), who had participated in the

2007 hearings mentioned earlier, was present and stated:

There are increasing studies and a body of evidence
that show that there is a significant risk to individuals
who suffer repeated head trauma, whether it's in the
NFL, in professional boxing, or even high school
sportso and while there are those here today who will
argue against the validity of some of these studiesn
there appears to be a preponderance of evidence that
a number of professional athletes who suffer repeated
head trauma experience physical and mental decline
earlier than the general population at large, and it
would seem to m+and I stated this to Commissioner
Goodell at the last hearing that we held that it would
be better for the NFL and the NFLPA to be proactive
in alerting its players to the risks that they face, and
it's my hope that in the discussion that we have here
today, the NFL and the NFLPA will make continued
improvements in educating players on the dangers
they face by playing with a concussion, treating those
athletes appropriately who do have concussions, and
removing the stigma that pressures players to play
through the injury, and one of the most recent quotes
that was heard on November 29th, 2009, \ryas an
interview during the pregame show before the
62

Steelers' matchup with the Ravens when somebody
said, basically, that he had been dinged up and got
right back into the game and that, you know, just
because somebody's having headaches, pretty much
the quote is, you know, they need to suck it up and
continue to play on, and the fact of the matter is that
sucking it up and continuing to play on may mean
very serious and grave consequences down the line.
Many witnesses that we have had before the Committee
have testified about how the NFL, like it or not,
influences the lower levels of football, and the actions
that they take or the actions that they choose to ignore to
take have significant impact on players at lower levels.
The NFL, quite frankly, has vast resources available to its
disposal to educate coaches and players and medical
personnel on the proper way to handle a concussed
player, and if they have all these resources available to
them and are not addressing the problem, imagine how
can we expect every high school or college to be able to
properly treat a concussed player if that proper action
isn't being taken at the very top levels of the sport?
(Emphases added).

167. Despite this overwhelming evidence, Goodell

refused to answer questions

of whether NFl-related concussions led to cognitive decline among retired players. The
Judiciary Committee played a televised interview of Casson denying any links between NFL
players' multiple head injuries and subsequent cognitive deterioration.

168.

Sanchez pressed the issue with Goodell during his testimony as follows:

Now, the question that

I have for you is, I am a little

concerned, and I hear the concem expressed by some of
the witnesses on the panel today, that the NFL sort of
has this kind of blanket denial or minimizing of the
fact that there may be this, you know, link. And it sort
of reminds me of the tobacco companies pre-1"990's
when they kept saying no, there is no link between
smoking and damage to your health or ill health
effects. And they were forced to admit that that was
incorrect through a spate of litigation in the 1990's.
And my question to you is wouldn't the league be better
off legally, and wouldn't high school and college football
63

players be better oft if instead of trying to minimize this
issue, the league took the opposite perspective and said,
look, even if there is a risk, however minuscule, that
there may be this link, so we really need to jump on top
of it and make kids and parents aware of this so that there
isn't this sort of sense that the NFL is really just slow
walking the issue to death by saying, well, we have been
studying the issue for 15 years, we are going to maybe
study it another 15 more years, when there is already
non-NFL paid for research that suggests that there is this
very high correlation with cognitive impairment? Don't
you think the league, you know, would be better off
legally, and that our youth might be a little bit better off
in terms of knowledge, if you guys just embraced that
there is research that suggests this and admitted to it?
(Emphases added).

Mr. GOODELL. Well, Congresswoman,I do believe that
we have embraced the research, the medical study of this
issue. As you point out-

Ms. SANCHEZ. You are talking about one study, and
that is the NFL's study. You are not talking about the
independent studies that have been conducted by other
researchers. Am I correct in stating that?
Mr. GOODELL. I am not sure of your question.

Ms. SANCHEZ. There are other studies, research in
dementia and CTE that show that there is a link. But
again the league seems to downplay that and say, well,
you know, we are conducting our own study and, you
know, when we have that study completed then we will
know.

Mr. GOODELL. No, I think what we are doing is
because we have to a large extent driven this issue by
making sure that we have medical professionals studying
this issue. I am not a medical professional.
* *,F {.

[Ms. SANCHEZ.] So my question is why are you even
going through, you know, the charade of presenting
the final analysis of going through this study if the
determination, in my opinion, has already been made
64