By Ryan M. Rodenberg and Yoon Tae Sung
On October 15, 2012, David Mancina, a fan of the New Orleans Saints filed a lawsuit against Roger Goodell, commissioner of the National Football League (“NFL”) and the league itself. Mancina’s complaint was framed as a class action lawsuit representing all season and single ticket holders for the Saints games during the current 2012-2013 season. The premise of the lawsuit stems from the NFL’s punishment in connection with the purported Saints bounty program scandal, an on-going issue that is being separately adjudicated. On March 21, 2012, following an internal investigation, the NFL meted out punishment against the New Orleans team, with the head coach, assistant coach, general manager, and several current and former players being suspended. Moreover, the team was required to forfeit its second round of draft choices in 2012 and 2013.
Mancina contended that the tickets he and other fans purchased were devalued since the quality of the Saints games would be lower than expected due to the punishments by Goodell and the NFL. Furthermore, as a result of all of the suspensions, he alleged that the quality of the team has been depreciated making the Saints less competitive and more likely to lose their (home) games. Additionally, he asserted that Goodell and the NFL did not consider fans who purchased tickets before he reprimanded the team.
Mancina believed that there was not sufficient evidence or due process to warrant the suspensions. In his complaint, Mancina also argued that “no opponent team member, news media representative, or NFL professional reviewer of game films of the New Orleans Saints for the years 2008-2011 reported any evidence of unusual, prohibited, or abnormal” performance by the Saints players, so the punishments and suspensions were groundless decisions by the defendants. Mancina further contended that the team could have been punished in an alternative way that would not have influenced the quality of play and caused harm to innocent ticker holders. Mancina concluded that he and the class of ticket purchasers should be monetarily compensated.
Mancina’s complaint can generally be described as one falling under the “disappointed sports fan” umbrella and is by no means the first to do so.[4] At least two sports-specific lawsuits decided in the past six years have helped define the legal rights of aggrieved fans. The most recent example of such a lawsuit was based on the so-called “Spygate” scandal involving clandestine videotaping of opposing teams by New England Patriots employees working for head coach Bill Belichick. Plaintiff Carl Mayer, a New York Jets season ticket holder, sued Belichick, the New England Patriots, and the NFL alleging that such 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, regulations, and NFL rules.”[5] Mayer’s amended complaint included nine counts, largely a mix of state and federal breach of contract, fraud, and racketeering claims.[6] The Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of the suit, rationalized that Mayer “possessed nothing more than a contractual right to a seat from which to watch an NFL game between the Jets and the Patriots, and this right was clearly honored.”[7]
Bowers v. Federation Internationale de L’Automobile stemmed from irate fans filing suit after “Indygate,” a debacle at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway when only six of the twenty cars slated to race actually took part after tire problems sidelined the other drivers and their vehicles.[8] Bowers and other facing fans sued, claiming that they should be refunded the price of their ticket and other expenses (e.g. travel and lodging) incurred in connection with the event.[9] The plaintiffs’ claims were based on theories of negligence, promissory estoppel, and breach of contract.[10] The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals considered and rejected each, although the court did recognize that plaintiffs may have been justifiably upset based on what transpired at the race.[11]
The non-plaintiff-friendly result in each of the foregoing related cases does not bode well for Mancina in his suit against Goodell and the NFL stemming from “Bountygate.” Defendants will almost certainly file a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), as Mancina’s complaint includes fewer details than either of the complaints filed in the two tangentially analogous cases. In addition, Goodell and the NFL may seek sanctions in connection with Mancina’s lawsuit.
Ryan M. Rodenberg is an assistant professor of sports law analytics at Florida State University. Yoon Tae Sung is a doctoral student at Florida State University. He earned his master’s degree from University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. © Ryan M. Rodenberg and Yoon Tae Sung 2012.
[4] For a discussion of related lawsuits pertaining to non-sports live entertainment (e.g. music concerts), see Brian A. Rosentblatt, I Know, It’s Only Rock and Roll, but Did They Like It?: An Assessment of Causes of Action Concerning the Disappointment of Subjective Consumer Expectations Within the Live Performance Industry, 13 UCLA Entertainment Law Review 33 (2005-2006).
5 Mayer v. Belichick, et al, 605 F.3d 223 (3rd Cir. 2010).
6 Id.
7 Id.
8 Bowers, et al v. Federation Internationale de L’Automobile, et al, 489 F.3d 316 (7th Cir. 2007).
9 Id.
10 Id.
11 Id.
