In a Twist, Judge Overturns Arbitration Decision Suspending Tom Brady
2 min read
Sep 3, 2015
On September 3, Judge Richard Berman of Southern District of New York overturned the NFL's four-game suspension of New England Patriots’ quarterback Tom Brady. Besides being a dream come true for ESPN, the ruling is quite significant from a labor and employment law perspective, as the judge drastically departed from courts' typical deference to arbitration awards and unwillingness to interfere with the language in collective bargaining agreements.
Typically, courts give greater deference to arbitration awards, and overturn decisions only in rare instances. The theory is that greater court interference in the arbitral process would only serve to encourage parties to forego arbitration and proceed with litigation in the courts. Courts are similarly bound by the four corners of a bargaining agreement, and must decide cases in compliance with the contractual terms negotiated therein.
Notwithstanding the above, Judge Berman determined in the case (National Football League Management Council v. National Football League Players Association) that the arbitration suffered from several “legal deficiencies” that undermined its result. Using the language of the collective bargaining agreement – as well as that of several prior opinions issued against the NFL – Judge Berman found that Brady had not been given sufficient notice that his actions could result in a four game suspension; there is no language in the bargaining agreement giving players notice of a possible suspension for equipment violations, such as the deflation of footballs. (The NFL had attempted to compare Brady’s purported offense to that of performance enhancing drug violations, of which there is extensive language in the bargaining agreement). Similarly, Judge Berman hammered the NFL for suspending Brady for allegedly being “generally aware” of a violation, particularly because the NFL had never disciplined another player for a similar offense. Finally, the court determined that Commissioner Roger Goodell – also acting as the arbitrator in the case – improperly denied Brady’s motions to call a central witness at the arbitration and to examine notes prepared by the NFL in support of its initial determination to suspend Brady.
Judge Berman was very careful to avoid issuing an opinion on which parties could rely to overturn future arbitration awards. By using facts unique to this case, the court successfully balanced its need to support its determination to vacate the arbitration award in this case while not providing precedent for doing so in the future.
Questions? Contact your regular Hinshaw employment attorney.
Topics
Featured Insights

In The News
Aug 24, 2026
David Schultz Reviews a Humorous—But Important—FDCPA Procedural Ruling

Press Release
Aug 20, 2026
115 Hinshaw Lawyers Recognized in 2027 Editions of The Best Lawyers in America® and Ones to Watch®

Press Release
Aug 20, 2026
Hinshaw’s Landmark Tower Client Project Receives 2026 Top Projects Award

Press Release
Aug 19, 2026
Fernando Rivera-Maissonet Elected as HNBA Region II Governor and Board of Governors Member

Employment Law Observer
Aug 17, 2026
Massachusetts’ First Paid Family Medical Leave Act Verdict Yields $4.75 Million Award

Press Release
Aug 13, 2026
Lauren Campisi Recognized as a 2026 BTI Client Service All-Star by BTI Consulting Group

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Aug 13, 2026
How Will Banks Be Impacted by the Proposed Regulation O Amendments?

Press Release
Aug 12, 2026
William Cook Honored With the Distinguished Service Award by the Chicago Bar Association

Webinar
Aug 12, 2026
John Ryan Presents on "Understanding what is Covered Under the TCPA Today"

In The News
Aug 12, 2026
Scott Seaman Analyzes California’s New Pleading Standards for Excess Insurance Policy Claims


