PAINKILLERS AND PREEMPTION: "DENT"-ING THE NFL'S PREEMPTION DEFENSE

In lawsuits brought by professional athletes against their respective sports leagues, one of the leagues' most effective defenses has been preemption. This defense comes from federal labor law-Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act ("LMRA")-which effectively prevents any st...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inWake Forest law review Vol. 54; no. 3; p. 859
Main Author Cain, Thomas
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Winston-Salem Wake Forest University School of Law 01.10.2019
Subjects
Athletes
Collective bargaining
Drugs
Labor contracts
Labor law
Licensed products
Litigation
Preemption
Professional football
Professional sports
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:In lawsuits brought by professional athletes against their respective sports leagues, one of the leagues' most effective defenses has been preemption. This defense comes from federal labor law-Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act ("LMRA")-which effectively prevents any state-law claims that arise from or involve interpretation of the organization's collective bargaining agreement ("CBA"). In 2014, when a group of retired professional football players sued the National Football League ("NFL") for its handling and distribution of dangerous painkillers, it appeared that the preemption defense would once again prevail. However, in Dent v. National Football League, the Ninth Circuit held that the players' claims were not preempted by Section 301 because, as pleaded, the claims did not "arise from," nor were they "intertwined" with, the collective bargaining agreement. This Note analyzes the players' pleading in Dent, specifically examining why the players were able to avoid preemption in this case. Further, this Note looks at the history of the "preemption defense" often used by the NFL and its gradual erosion. This Note argues that the Dent case, whether or not it succeeds on the merits, will have long-lasting effects for professional sports leagues and their players, both in future lawsuits and future CBAs.
ISSN:0043-003X