matthews vs. nflmc - mcguff, jonathan c

8
S Matthews vs. National Football League Management Council By: Jonathan McGuff

Upload: jonathan-c-mcguff

Post on 16-Apr-2017

156 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Matthews vs. NFLMC - McGuff, Jonathan C

S

Matthews vs. National Football League Management Council

By: Jonathan McGuff

Page 2: Matthews vs. NFLMC - McGuff, Jonathan C

Background

Bruce Matthews played in the National Football League (NFL) from 1983 to 2002 for the Houston Oilers and later Tennessee Titans.

In 2008, Matthews files for workers compensation benefits in the state of California.

Filed due to pain and disability from injuries sustained while playing in the NFL.

Page 3: Matthews vs. NFLMC - McGuff, Jonathan C

Background (Con’t)

Titans and NFLMC file a grievance against Matthews, stating he breached his employment agreement.

The dispute stemmed from Matthews filing for workers compensation in California, while his employment dictated workers compensation claims to be decided in Tennessee.

Arbitrator in case found Matthews in violation of the agreement.

In January 2011, Matthews appeals the district court’s decision.

Page 4: Matthews vs. NFLMC - McGuff, Jonathan C

California Public Policy

Matthews claims California has a dominant public policy, and essentially he has universal right to seek workers compensation in California.

However, Matthews does not show that he was specifically injured while playing in California or received medical attention while in the state.

Matthews needed to show he had enough contact with the state in order to file for workers compensation under California law.

Page 5: Matthews vs. NFLMC - McGuff, Jonathan C

Federal Labor Policy

Matthews attempts to argue that the arbitration award should be vacated, as it violates the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Supreme Court disagrees, stating California did not have “absolute right” to apply its law in this situation.

Matthews could not show Full Faith and Credit Clause would guarantee that the state of California would apply its law based on this case.

Page 6: Matthews vs. NFLMC - McGuff, Jonathan C

Summary of Findings

Matthews could not prove the arbitration award he was thought to be owed violated federal labor policies (The Recorder)

The court of appeals affirmed the order of the district court, and Matthews lost the case (The Recorder)

Page 7: Matthews vs. NFLMC - McGuff, Jonathan C

Footnotes

Matthews contract stated all matters of workers compensation would need to be handled in the state of Tennessee.

Matthews claims were soundly defeated because they were not supported by factual evidence.

Even if Matthews had sustained some of his injuries in California, it was unclear as to whether or not the state’s workers compensation claims would have applied to him.

Page 8: Matthews vs. NFLMC - McGuff, Jonathan C

References

The Recorder. (2012, August 6). Matthews V. National Football League Management Council. Retrieved from http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202566310737/Mathews-v-National-Football-League-Management-Council?slreturn=20150210041708