ORIGINAL

FREDD HEATHER - State Bar No. 110650 fheatherfl iglaserweil.com

ADAM EEBERTHON - State Bar No. 145226

aIeberthon@glaserweil.com
MARY ANN T. NGUYEN - State Bar No. 269099

mnguyen@glaserweil.com
GLASERWEIL FINK JACOBS HOWARD AVCHEN & SHAPIRO LLP

Superior Court of Ca California or
Cou county

FILED

of Los Angeles

10250 Constellation Boulevard, 19th Floor

MAY 21 2012
A. Ctate, Executive Office John A.CJarfje,ExwujiveJ^fficer/Cterk

Los Angeles, California 90067 Telephone: (310)553-3000 Facsimile: (310)556-2920
THOMAS V. GIRARDI - State Bar No. 36603 GRAHAM B. LIPPSMITH - State Bar No. 221984 CELENE S. CHAN - State Bar No. 260267
GIRARDI KEESE 1126 Wilshire Boulevard
10

Bv ^

MOSES §M ^^

<iffi^\ Deputy

Telephone: (213) 977-0211

Los Angeles, California 90017

r-.

\) " D %
;isl

O

n

Facsimile: (213)481-1154
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Johnnie Morton, et al.

^[\ Au viG'cf

[)vfrf-L£iO\S

12

.8 2
o

13
C

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

c sz
u

14

15
16
V)

O

X

17

18

MCCORVEY; KURT BARBER; MIKE SHERRARD; STOCKAR MCDOUGLE and his wife, OCTAVIA MCDOUGLE; TOI COOK and his wife, KRISTINE

JOHNNIE MORTON: KEZ

Case No. BC485131
Assigned to the Honorable
Department:
COM PLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1. 2.

19
20

COOK; BRIAN C. DUDLEY; BRAD

21

22

BOOTH: CHRIS HALE; JOHN JACKSON and his wife, ANN FRANCES JACKSON; DENNIS CLAY and his wife, STACEY CLAY; NORMAN SCOTT BYERS and his wife, STEPHANIE BYERS; and DARRYL CRANE, Plaintiffs,

Negligence;
Fraud; Fraudulent Concealment;

3.
4.

Negligent Misrepresentation;

23

24
v.

5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Negligence;

Strict Liability for Des^ §#Bt;
" a w•* "
m a: t j -s a» u > -h a

Negligence; §| s w „
m s> to —

Failure to Wm%> « ^

£2 £2 <=* "

_

wW
60

Loss or ConsOimrm?

at

sg

G3 t<i

o

.cs co

\

QUI

25

DEMAND FOR JURY JRraE § £
o

26 27
28

NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE; NFL PROPERTIES, LLC; RIDDELL, INC: d/b/a/ RIDDELL SPORTS GROUP,

ro <o i— oo m S o X•« oO- w -J rry at

INC.; ALL AMERICAN SPORTS CORPORATION, d/b/a RIDDELL/ALL AMERICAN; RIDDELL SPORTS
COMPLAINT

o

o

760727

1

2

GROUP, INC.; EASTON-BELL SPORTS, INC.; EASTON-BELL SPORTS, LLC; EB SPORTS CORP.; AND RBG HOLDINGS CORP.; and

Does 1 through 100, inclusive.
3

Defendants.
4'

5

Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves, by and through their attorneys, hereby
complain of Defendants named above, and hereby al lege as follows:
I. INTRODUCTION

6
7

8

1.

This action is brought by Plaintiffs former National Football League

9
10

("NFL" or "League") players who seek damages for the long-term chronic injuries,
financial losses, expenses, and intangible losses they suffered as a
result of

11

Defendants' wrongful conduct with respect to concussive brain injuries sustained by
Plaintiffsduring their NFL careers and the subsequent damaging effects.
2. For many decades, evidence has linked repetitive concussive brain injuries to long-term neurological problems in many sports. Defendants were aware
of the evidence and the subsequent damaging effects associated with repetitive

12

2
O '5.
u

13

—!«/>
J*' eg c c

14

<u
_c u

JU
•_

15

16
17

concussive brain injuries; however, Defendants deliberately ignored, misrepresented

O

I

and actively concealed the information from Plaintiffs and all others who participated
in organized football.
3. In 1994, the NFL voluntarily undertook to create and fund the Mild

18
19

20
21

Traumatic Brain Injury Committee (the "MTBI") in an attempt to undermine existing
scientific studies and evidence that linked head concussions received by NFL players

22
23

to long-term neurological problems. In 1997, Riddell became a part of the MTBFs
project of assessing concussions and health consequences to NFL players by

24

analyzing and reconstructing head impacts. These studies have largely contradicted
over 75 years of weighted scientific evidence.

25
26

4.

Simply put, Defendants not only failed to inform players of the true risks

27

of concussive brain injuries and the subsequent damaging effects, but also fraudulently misrepresented and concealed medical evidence on the issue from
l

28

COMPLAINT
760727

i

Plaintiffs.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2

3
4

5.
10.

Jurisdiction is based upon the California Constitution Article 6, Section

5

6.

Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to Section 395(A) of the

6
7

California Code of Civil Procedure.

III.

IDENTIFICATION OF THE PARTIES
Plaintiffs

8
9

7.
California.

Mr. Johnnie Morton is a resident of and is domiciled in the State of

10
II

8.
Florida.

Mr. Kez McCorvey is a resident of and is domiciled in the State of

12
o
u «

a.
« to

13

9.

Mr. Kurt Barber is a resident of and is dbmiciled in the State of

cS
c
c

14

<u
JC

Kentucky.

15

10.
California.

Mr. Mike Sherrard is a resident of and i^ domiciled in the State of

J3i 6 oil

SI g

16
17

11.

Mr. Stockar McDougle and his wife, Odtavia, are residents of and are

18
19

domiciled in the State of Florida.

12.

Mr. Toi Cook and his wife, Kristine, arcj residents of and are domiciled

20

in the State of California.

21
22

13.
California.

Mr. Brian C. Dudley is a resident of ancj is domiciled in the State of
Mr. Brad Booth is a resident of and is domiciled in the State of

23
24

14.
California.

25

26
27

15. 16.
17.

Mr. Chris Hale is a resident of and is domiciled in the State ofCalifornia. Mr. John Jackson and his wife, Ann Frances, are residents ofand are
Mr. Dennis Clay and his wife, Stacey, a|"e residents of and are domiciled
2
COMPLAINT

domiciled in the State of California.

28

760727

in the State of California.
2

18.
19.
20.

Mr. Norman Scott Byers and his wife, Stephanie, are residents of and are
Mr. DairyICrane is a resident of and is domiciled in the State of Florida.
Defendants

3
4

domiciled in the State of California.

5
6

Defendant National Football League (th e "NFL") is an unincorporated

7

association, consisting of 32 separately-owned and i ndependently-operated member
clubs, with its headquarters and principal place of business located at 280 Park
gaged in interstate commerce Avenue, New York, New York 10017. The NFL is em

8

9

10

and is in the business of, among other things, operatin g the sole major professional

11

football league in the United States. The NFL reguIdrly conducts business in the
State of California.

1/1

12
fl-

.£>

O
u

.2.
c

sz •><Si

13
14

21.

Defendant NFL Properties, LLC, as the successor-in-interest to National

cS
£

Football League Properties, Inc. ("NFL Properties") is a limited liability company

jC
u

15
'_

organized and existing under the laws of the State off Delaware with its headquarters
*ed in the State of New York. NFL Properties is engag in, among other activities, the

16
VI

O

X

17

approving of licensing and the promotion of equipment used by all the NFL teams,
NFL Properties regularly conducts business in the State of California,
22. Defendant Riddell, Inc. (d/b/a Riddell ^ports Group, Inc.) ("Riddell,

18 19
20

Inc.") is a corporation organized and existing under he laws of the State of Illinois with its principal place of business at 3670 North Milwaukee Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60641. Riddell, Inc. is engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing,
selling and distributing football equipment, including helmets, to the NFL, and has
been the official helmet provider of the NFL since 1£89. Riddell, Inc. regularly
conducts business in the State of California.

21

22

23

24

25

26

23.

Defendant All American Sports Corporation (d/b/a Riddell/All

27
28

American) ("All American Sports") is a corporation organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Delaware with its principal places of business at 669 Sugar Lane,
COMPLAINT

760727

l

Elyria, Ohio 44035. All American Sports is engaged in the business of designing,

2

manufacturing, selling and distributing football equipment , including helmets, to the

3

NFL, and has been the official helmet provider of the^ NFL since
Sports regularly conducts business in the State of Ca ifornia.

1989. All American

4

5

24.

Defendant Riddell Sports Group, Inc. (" Riddell Sports Group") is a
of the State of Delaware with its

6

corporation organized and existing under the laws

7

principal place of business at 6255 N. State Highway^ Suite 300, Irving, Texas 76038.
Riddell Sports Group operates as a subsidiary of Easlon Bell Sports, Inc. Riddell

8
9

Sport Groups regularly conducts business in the Stat^ of California.
25. Defendant Easton-Bell Sports, Inc. is a Corporation organized and

10
11

existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business at

to

12

ia 7855 Haskell Avenue, Suite 200, Van Nuys, California 91406. Easton-Bell Sports,

-Q

O
(J

9to <*
C

13 14

Inc. is a parent corporation of Riddell Sports Group Easton-Bell Sports, Inc. is engaged in the business of designing, developing and! marketing branded athletic

c

<u

I
o

15

equipment and accessories, including marketing and licensing products under the
Riddell brand. Easton-Bell Sports, Inc. regularly conducts business in the State of
California.

16

17

18
19

26.

Defendant Easton-Bell Sports, LLC (' Easton-Bell Sports, LLC") is a

corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business at 152 West 57th Street, New York, New York 10019.
Easton-Bell Sports, LLC is the parent corporation of Easton-Bell Sports, Inc. EastonBell Sports, LLC regularly conducts business in the State of California,
27. Defendant EB Sports Corp. is a corporation organized and existing under
ace of business at 7855 Haskell

20

21

22
23

24

the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal p

25

Avenue, Van Nuys, California 91406. All of the i issiied and outstanding voting common stock of EB Sports Corp. is owned by Eastdn-Bell Sports, LLC. EB Sports Corp. regularly conducts business in the State of California. 28. Defendant RBG Holdings Corp. is a corporation organized and existing
4

26
27

28

COMPLAINT
760727

1

under the laws of the State of Delaware with its princ ipal place of business at 7855

2

Haskell Avenue, Suite 350, Van Nuys, California 91406. RBG Holdings Corp. is a

3

wholly-owned subsidiary of EB Sports Corp. RBG foldings Corp. regularly
conducts business in the State of California.

4

5

29.

Defendants Riddell, Inc., All American Sports, Riddell Sports Group,

6
7

Easton-Bell Sports, Inc., Easton-Bell Sports, LLC, EB Sports Corp. and RBG

Holdings Corp., shall hereinafter be referred to collectively as "Riddell" or the
"Riddell Defendants." The NFL and Riddell are collectively referred to as
"Defendants."

8

9
10

IV.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
The NFL

11

vt

12

30.

The NFL was founded as the American Professional Football

Si

e
rs jC CO

O
o

13
14

Association in 1920 and has been known as the Nati (^nal

Football League (NFL) since

<*
c c 0)
u

1922. The NFL is and was, at all times herein mentioned, engaged in the business of

15

managing, governing and promoting the game of football, setting and enforcing rules

<u

16
o

and league policies, and regulating team ownership.
31. Today, the NFL consists of 32 team members, generates over $9 billion

O

I

17

18

annually, and has tremendous influence in the poliiticls and medical research relating
to football-related injuries. According to a recent WkU Street Journal article, the NFL

19
20

spent nearly $5.5 million on lobbying firms since 2006 to address a host of issues,
including, player concussions. According to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, the
NFL has invested over $5 million in researching concussions alone.

21 22

23

32.

Upon information and belief, Plaintiffs sustained one or more concussive

24
25

brain injuries while playing and/or practicing during their NFL careers.
Riddell 33.

26
27

The Riddell Defendants are and were, a all times herein mentioned,

engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing, selling and distributing football equipment, including helmets, to the NFL. Since
5

28

1989 ,

Riddell's helmets have been

COMPLAINT
760727

the "official helmet of the NFL." Riddell is currently under contract with the NFL

allowing Riddell to continue as the NFL's primary helmet provider through 2014.
The NFL estimates that 75% of the helmets used in
4

trie

NFL are manufactured by

Riddell - Riddell estimates that figure is 77%.

5

34.

In 1997, Riddell became a part of the MTBFs project of assessing

6

concussions and health consequences to NFL players by analyzing and reconstructing

7

Ihead impacts.
35. In 2006, Riddell undertook a study appearing in Neurosurgery that was

8

9
10

co-authored by members of the MTBI. The study touted Riddell's "Revolution" helmet as reducing the risk of concussions in over 2, 000 high school athletes in

11

Western Pennsylvania. The study has been publicly criticized as being worthless,

I/I

12

36.

Upon information and belief, Plaintiffs wore Riddell

helmets at time

JO

o
o w

13
<to

while playing and/or practicing during their NFL careers.
The CBA

J*
c

C <u

14

_fl>

I
T3

15
16

37.

Until March 2011, NFL players were

all members of the National The

vt

Football League Players Association ("NFLPA").

NFLPA negotiates the

o

17

Collective Bargaining Agreement (the "CBA") settirpg forth the general minimum
contract for all players in the NFL with the National Football League Management
Council ("NFLMC").

18

19

20

38.

The CBA was in place since 1993 and ^vas amended

in 1998 and again in
.

21

2006. The CBA was originally scheduled to expire at the end of the 2012 season;

22

however, in 2008, the owners exercised their right tc| opt-out of the CBA two years
39. In 2011, the parties failed to reach an a:greement for a new CBA.

23 Searlier.

24 1
25
26

Subsequently, the NFLPA was decertified as the placers' representative for collective
bargaining.
40. Plaintiffs herein are all retirees, are not covered by the CBA, and are not

27

28

subject of or parties to any collective bargaining betiveen the NFL and the NFLPA.
6 COMPLAINT

760727

The CBA does not apply to Plaintiffs' present claims Thus, Plaintiffs' claims are not
2

preempted by federal labor law.
The Scientific Evidence On Concussion Risks

3

J

4

41.

Physicians and academics have exhaustively studied and reported the

5

dangers of concussions suffered both inside and outside of sports for well over 75
years.

6

1 1

7
8 9
10

42.

In 1928, the first case of "Punch Drunk' syndrome in boxers was

published in the American Association Journal by H S. Martland, which found that
cranial injuries may result in a degenerative progressive lesion or series of scars in the

1
I

brain tissue, which may eventually result in the condition known as traumatic
encephalitis.

11
a.

J3i U

">> 0

12

43.

^dicine, Vol. 246, discussed a In 1952, the New England Journal ofMt
if you receive three concussions

ops.

SJS —></»
j*: c o8
C

13
14

1945 "three strike rule" for concussions in football -

ill
—**

0)
u

playing football, you should retire. 44. In 1969, a report by the Royal College of Physicians of London

<u

£
i
*

<

5

15

i_

i

[

0)
(/>

"E
J> o

16
17 18
19

confirmed the dangers of chronic brain damage occutnng in boxers as a result of their
careers.

|

os

O I

i

I

45.

In 1973, neurosurgeon R.C. Schneider first described the risks of a

disabling and sometimes deadly condition involving a second impact concussion
disapp*ear. This phenomenon was occurring before symptoms of a first concussion di

20

21
22

termed "Second-impact syndrome" in 1984 by Dr. R .L.
46.

Saunders.

In 1980, the Clinical Neurosurgery pub ished an article titled, "Football

i

I

23
24

head and neck injuries - an update," which conclude^! that: "Arbitrarily, most
physicians discourage further football participation i an athlete has suffered three
cerebral concussions. Strong consideration must be given, however, not only to the

:!l .*
•s

25
26

*
• ?•
' H,

number and severity of the concussion, but also to

any CAT scan evidence of cerebral

' Jl

27

edema, contusion, or hemorrhage. With this incredibly sensitive diagnostic tool, one
concussion, which is assorted with radiographic evidence of structural brain damage,
7

28

!
t

COMPLAINT
760727

I

may be enough to strongly discourage or forbid further football participation."
47. In 1982, the Canadian Medical Association Journal published an article

2

3
4

titled "Return to athletic competition following concussion," which concluded that:
"The basic recommendation is that return to training and competition should be

5

deferred until all associated symptoms such as headaches have completely resolved.
The decision to return must take into account the nature of the sport, the athlete's

6
7

level of participation and the cumulative effect ofprevious concussions. Some
athletes will have to avoid any further participation of their sport."

8 9

48.

In 1986, the Physician and Sports Medicine Journal published an article

10
II

by Dr. Robert Cantu titled "Guidelines for return to contact sports after cerebral
concussion," which established a system to grade the severity of concussions and

I/)

12

e

o

"a>to
C

13
14

corresponding guidelines for when players should return. Specifically, the Cantu guidelines permit an athlete to return to play after one week ofsustaining a first lowgrade concussion only if the athlete is asymptomatic, 49. In 1991, JAMA published an article titled "Concussion in sports.

C

<u
x:
u

J*>
<_

15

"E
?
O

16
17

I

Guidelines for the prevention ofcatastrophic outcome," which described "a high school football player who died ofdiffuse brain swelling after repeated concussions
without loss of consciousness" and guidelines "to reduce the risk of such serious
catastrophic outcomes after concussion in sports."

18
19
20

50.

In 2000, a University of North Carolina study, published in the

21

22
23
24

September-October issue ofthe American Journal ofSports Medicine, found that "the brain is more susceptible to injury when it has not had enough time to recover from a first injury" and "recurrences are more likely because injured players are returning to
practice and to games too quickly after blows to the head."
51. In 2001, a report by Dr. Frederick Muel ler published in the Journal of

25

26 27
28

Athlete Training reported that at least one football-related fatality occurred every year

from 1945 through 1999, except for 1990. Head-related deaths accounted for 69% of
football fatalities. From 1984 through 1999,69 football head-related injuries resulted
8
COMPLAINT

760727

i Iin permanent disability.
2 3
4

52.

In 2002, Dr. Bennet Omalu, a forensic pathologist and neuropathologist

in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, identified a brain condition termed "Chronic Traumatic

Encephalopathy" or "CTE." Dr. Omalu discovered the condition, marked by dark
brown protein staining on the brain while studying the brain of Mike Webster, a

5

6
7

National Football League Hall of Famer who died at the age of 50 after years of

severe depression and dementia that had reduced him to homelessness. By 2007, Dr.
Omalu had identified CTE in the brains of three other deceased former NFL players.

8 9

He determined the type of brain damage he found in the players was of the same type

10

found in punch-drunk boxers. To date, neuroanatomists have performed autopsies on 13 former NFL players who died after exhibiting signs of degenerative brain disease.
Twelve of these players were found to have suffered from CTE.
53.

11

12

e
o
x:
t/5

13

niversity of North Carolina In 2003, Dr. Kevin Guskiewicz of the Ui

c

c

14

found that having three or four concussions meant twice the risk of depression as

jc
u

JU

15

never-concussed players, and five or more concussions meant nearly a threefold risk.
In 2005, Dr. Guskiewicz also found that retired NFL players who sustained three or
more concussions were five times as likely to suffer Mild Cognitive Impairment

<U

16
O

17

18
19

("MCI") than retired NFL players who had no history of concussions. 54. In 2003, a NCAA study of 2,905 college football players found that
those who have suffered concussions are more susceptible to further head trauma for
7 to 10 days after the injury.

20

21

22

55.

In 2008, Dr. Ann McKee ("McKee") off Boston University examined the

23
24

brain tissues of deceased NFL players - John Grimsley ("Grimsley") and Tom

McHale ("McHale") (both died at the age of 45). McKee found that Grimsley and
McHale's brain tissue exhibited indications of CTE. McKee noted that "the easiest

25

26

way to decrease the incidence of CTE is to decrease the number of concussions."

27

McKee further noted that "there is overwhelming evidence that [CTE] is the result of
repeated sublethal brain trauma."
9 COMPLAINT

28

760727

56.
2

In 2008, Boston University School of Mbdicine's Center for the Study of

Traumatic Encephalopathy (CSTE) found signs of"severe degradation" in the brains
of ex-NFL athletes. The CSTE also found that

3
4

former NFL players between the ages

of thirty and forty-nine experienced memory loss at a rate 19 times higher than the
average population. ,

5

6
7

57.

In 2009, the University of Michigan's Institute for

Social Research

published a study of retired NFL players which found that retired NFL players are

8
9
10

diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease or similar medical conditions far more often than
the national population, including a rate of 19 times
aged 30 to 49.
the normal incidence for men

11

58.

The foregoing references are by no meaitis exhaustive.
Defendants Have A Duty To The Placers And The Public

12

8
O
fS

Q.

JC 08

13
14

59.

The NFL possesses monopoly power over American Football

and over

c

C <L» JZ
u

the research and education of physicians, trainers, coaches and NFL players with

15

brain damage such as Plaintiffs, as well as the public at large, with regard to football injuries. Even more, the NFL overtly undertook the ^iuty to create and fund the MTBI to study concussions on behalf of all American Rules Football leagues and players,
As a result, the NFL owed a duty to everyone, including Plaintiffs, in the following
respects:

0)

"S
o

16

I

17

18

19
20 21 22

(a)

It owed a duty of reasonable care to protect Plaintiffs while

practicing or playing football during their NFL careers;
(b) It owed a duty of reasonable care to Plaintiffs to educate Plaintiffs

23
24

and other players in the NFL about concussion injury and/or CTE; (c) It owed a duty of reasonable care
to Plaintiff to educate

25
26

physicians, trainers and coaches about concussion injury and/or CTE;

(d)

It owed a duty of reasonable care to Plaintiff to have in place strict

27

return-to-play guidelines to prevent concussior^ injury and/or CTE;
(e) It owed a duty of reasonable care to Plaintiffs to promote a
10

28

COMPLAINT
760727

I

"whistleblower" system where teammates may bring to the attention of a

2

physician, trainer or coach that another player has sustained concussion injury;

3

(f)
(g)

It owned a duty of reasonable care to Plaintiffs to design rules and
It owed a duty of reasonable care to Plaintiffs to design rules to

4

adequate penalties for players who use their head or upper body to hit or tackle;
eliminate the risk of concussion during games and/or practices;

5
6

7 8 9
10

(h)

It owed a duty of reasonable care to Plaintiffs to promote research

I; into and cure for concussion injury and/or CTE; and

(i)

It owed a duty of reasonable care to State governments, local

jues sports organizations, all American Football leagues and players, and the pi public

11

at large to protect against the long-term effects of concussion injury and/or
CTE.

12
-O o
u

J2.
C

13
on
c

60.

In 1997, Riddell undertook to become a part of the MTBI's project of

14

assessing concessions and health consequences to NFL players by analyzing and

<i>
.c
u

I

15

reconstructing head impacts. In 2006, Riddell undercook a study appearing in Neurosurgery that was co-authored by members of the MTBI. The study touted

"5
o

16
17
18

I

Riddell's "Revolution" helmet as reducing the risk o\f concussions in over 2,000 high
school athletes in Western Pennsylvania. The study has been publicly criticized as being worthless.

19

20 21 22
23

61.

The NFL and Riddell knew as early as the 1920's of the potential

harmful effects on a player's brain of concussions, but concealed these facts from
physicians, trainers, coaches, players and the public until June 2010.
62. Prior to June 2010, Plaintiffs did not know, nor had reason to know, the

24

long-term effects of concussions and relied on the NFL and Riddell to protect them.
Defendants' Knowledge Of Concussions Risls Threatening The Players

25

•5»
26
27
28

63.

For decades, Defendants have known that concussions can lead to long-

term brain injury, including headaches, dizziness, deimentia, depression, Alzheimer's
disease and death. Defendants' knowledge of the concussion risks threatening the
n COMPLAINT

760727

1

players is evidenced by Defendants' undertakings to study and/or fund concussion
studies.

2
-\

j

64.

In addition, for over 75 years, the scientific and medical community has

4

produced and published medical literature in the United States and other
industrialized countries relating to and discussing the harmful effect on humans -

5

6

particularly players of American football - of repeated concessive
These publications were all available and easily accessible to

blows to the head.

7 8

all Defendants.

The NFL Ignored And Fraudulently Misrepresented
The Concussion Risks Threatening The Players

9

10

65.

Despite over 75 years of study and knowled;ge within the scientific and

II
12
jCI

jement role of the NFL, and the medical community, the supervisory and manag

studies funded by the NFL (as set forth more fully below) , the NFL and its designated

O
<J

a.

a

13
14

representatives, until more recently, have continuously and vehemently ignored any
relationship between NFL players suffering concussions while playing, the NFL

c

c

u

15

policies regarding tackling methodology or the NFL policies about return-to-play, and
long-term problems such as headaches, dizziness,
, depression, and/or

16
vt

o

I

17

Alzheimer's disease that many retired players have ej:xperienced. Such ignorance has
been evidenced in NFL publications, NFL sponsored so-called medical studies,

18

19 20

testimony of NFL representatives before Congress, and in the media. Indeed, not only has the NFL ignored the causal connection, the NFL has also taken an active role
in fraudulently concealing and downplaying any connection between concussions
football in the NFL and brain injury or illness.
66. In the early 1970s, the NFL became aware of publications accounting for
in

21 22
23

24

the rate and seriousness of concussion in the sport of football. At the same time, the

25

NFL became aware of the publication of a helmet standard, known as the National

26

Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equi pment (NOCSAE) for football
helmets, and which was intended to improve upon the safety of helmets and minimize

27

28

the risk of head injury. The NFL also learned that
12

the

NCAA and National High

COMPLAINT
760727

1

School Football Federations (NHSFF) had adopted a policy requiring by the

2

beginning of the 1978 season that all helmets used in their respective organizations

3

must be approved for sale and comply with the NOCSAE standard. However, the
NFL did not make or adopt a similar policy at that time
67. In 1976, the NCAA and NHSFF began to recognize that the helmet-face
iclmeted head as an offensive

4

5

6

mask combination was contributing to the use of the

7

weapon, which in turn increased the rate of concussi0ns Accordingly, the NCAA
and NHSFF initiated changes which prohibited contalct of the head in blocking and

8
9
10

tackling. While the NFL was aware of these risks and the changes made by the
NCAA and NHSFF, it failed to take similar action at that time. Instead, during the
in 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and 2000s, NFL players were be ing coached, trained and

II 12

IS)

e
a.
-C
l/>

encouraged to use all portions of their helmets to block, tackle, butt, spear, ram and/or

O
U

13
14

injure opposing players by hitting with their helmeteji heads.

These techniques were

oS c c

<u
-C
(J

condoned by the NFL and/or were not significantly cjondemned by the NFL.

15
1.

68.

It was not until 1979 that the NFL finally issued a rule that charged a
helmet. This undertaking

16
(A

penalty (though trivial) against players who are found to have used their helmets to
by the NFL, based upon its duty of care to the NFL pjlayers, however, fell far short of

o

X

n [butt, spear or ram an opponent with the crown or top of the
18

19

the important safety and injury prevention that it should have taken.

This rule came

20

several years after the 1976 rules by the NCAA and l^fHSFF were adopted and limited
the penalty only to contact with the crown or top of tie helmet, which ignored the
more prevalent practice of other helmet contact (contact other than
with the crown or

21

22

23

top of the helmet) that was causing a substantial and high rate of concussions among
NFL players.

24

25

69.

In 1994, the NFL voluntarily undertook to create and

fund the MTBI -

26

it's so-called "expert" committee - to purportedly situdy the effects of concussions on NFL players. The MTBI was chaired by Dr. Elliot

27

PJellman, a rheumatologist who

28

had no special knowledge of brain injuries or concus$ions. As explained more fully c
13

COMPLAINT
760727

below, the MTBI's NFL-funded "studies" (based on bias data collection techniques,
2

which omitted large numbers of players from its studies) regularly contradicted

3

established findings and did nothing but fraudulently conceal, misrepresent and

4

downplay clear medical evidence that on-field concussive brain injury led directly to long-term neurological problems for players.

5 6

70.

Forexample, in 2004, the MTBI published a paper in which it asserted
was no "7 to

7

that it found there was "no evidence of worsening injury or chronic cumulative effects

8

of multiple [mild traumatic brain injury] in NFL players" and that there

9
10

10-day window of increased susceptibility to sustaininig another concussion."

However, this article sends the message that it is acc^ ptable to return players to play
while still symptomatic, which contradicts literature published over the past twenty

it

|| 8
—>oo c c

12 13 14

years finding that athletes should be returned to play only after one week of sustaining
the injury and only if they are asymptomatic.

71.

As a further example, in 2005, the MTE)I published an article asserting

V JC
u

JU
T3

15

that returning to play after a concussion "does not inVolve significant risk of a second

16
O

injury either in the same game or during the season.'1 However, a 2003 NCAA study

o

17
18

of 2,905 college football players found just the opposite : "Those who have suffered
concussions are more susceptible to further head trauma
(Emphasis added),

19
20 21

72.

On August 14, 2007, the NFL issued a jjiress release and "informational"

pamphlets to its players - misinforming and downpl^yi ng the risks of concussive
brain injuries and the subsequent damaging effects fo its players. The press release
and pamphlets stated that:
Current research with professional athleptes has not shown that having
more than one or two concussions leads

22
23

24
25

to permanent problems.... It is

important to understand that there is no magic number for how many
concussions is too many. (Emphasis

26

27

73.

ac|ded). In November 2008 (and reiterated in September 2009), NFL spokesman I.
14

28

Greg Aiello ("Aiello") (again misinforming and downplaying the risks of concussive
COMPLAINT

760727

I

brain injuries and subsequent effects to the players) stated to the press:
Hundreds of thousands of people have played football and other sports

2

3
4

without experiencing any problem of this type and there continues to be
considerable debate within the medical community on the precise long-

5
6

term effects of concussions and how they relate to other risk factors.

7

Aiello neglected to mention that the "debate" was principally between scientists paid by the NFL and scientists operating independently ofthe NFL and that players and
teams have incentive for players to return to games despite persistent symptoms.

8

9

|

74. Surprisingly, in aDecember 20, 2009 interview, Aiello - who had so
steadfastly denied any causal link between concussions and brain injury justa few
months earlier - admitted that "it's quite obvious from the medical research that's
been done that concussions... lead to long-term probi

10
11

12

.212

8'fr «IJC
J*

13

75.

Nevertheless, at a January 2010 congressional hearing, Dr. Ira Casson of

C

c
<U

14

the MBTI provided oral and written testimony denying the validity ofstudies finding
a causal link between concussions and long-term neurological problems.
76. It was not until June 2010 that the NFL conceded that its efforts with

jc
u

i

i
1_

15

16
17
18

o

I

19

20

respect to concussions and brain injury and its research by the MTBI were rife with duplicity, conflicts of interest and shocking ineptitude and it was not until this time that the NFL finally warned any player ofthe long-term risks associated with multiple concussions, including headaches, dizziness, dementia, depression, Alzheimer's
disease, CTE and its related symptoms, and death.

21

22
23

Riddell Abetted The NFL And Misrepresented The Concussion Risks
Threatening The Players

24

77.

Riddell manufactures helmets for use by NFL players. Since 1989, the

25
26 27 28

Riddell helmet has been the NFL's official helmet and Riddell is the only helmet

manufacturer allowed to display its logo on helmets used in NFL games. Prior to the
commencement of the 2010 season, Riddell renewed

allowing Riddell to continue as the NFL's primary helmet provider through 2014.
15

COMPLAINT
760727

The NFL estimates that 75% of the helmets used in the NFL are manufactured by
2

Riddell (Riddell estimates that figure is 77%).

3

78.

Riddell has long been aware of medical issues concerning head injuries

4

and concussions. Nonetheless, despite being the maker of the "official helmet" for

5
6

the NFL, it did nothing to prevent the NFL's misrepresentations and concealment
described in preceding paragraphs.

7 8

79.

Indeed, Riddell actively abetted the work of the NFL's MTBI. In 1997,

Riddell became a part of the MTBI's project of assessing concessions and health

9
10

consequences to NFL players by analyzing and reconstructing head impacts. In 2006,
Riddell sponsored a study appearing in Neurosurgery that was co-authored by members of the MTBI. The study touted Riddell's "Revolution" helmet as reducing
the risk of concussions in over 2,000 high school athl etes in Western Pennsylvania,

II

12
.0

O 'a.
u « «

jC
08
c

13 14

The study has been publicly criticized as providing piayers with a mistaken sense of
security and being worthless.

J* c

cu
x:

15

80.

Riddell failed to warn active players of the risk of concussive brain

"E
JO
o

16
17

injuries and the subsequent damaging effects until approximately the same time as the
NFL.

X

18

Defendants' Conduct Rises Beyond Mere Negligence

19 20

81.

The aforementioned acts and omissions of Defendants demonstrate that

Defendants acted with callous indifference to the rights of and the duties owed to Plaintiffs, the all American Rules Football leagues arid players, and the public at
large.
82. The conduct of Defendants was willful and wanton and exhibits a

21

22 23
24

reckless disregard for the rights and safety of the players. Defendants, and each of
them, knew that a substantial risk of physical and mental harm to NFL players existed in connection with repeated concussive brain injuries. Defendants, and each of them,

25 26

27
28

consciously, willfully, and deliberately disregarded the safety of others in continually
undertaking to establish and promulgate rules for the NFL, but failing to address or
16
COMPLAINT

760727

1

disclose this substantial risk, as immediately aforesaid , in connection with such rules,

2

and/or continuing to manufacture, sell, and distribute football helmets which they knew would not protect,players against this risk. 83. Why NFL policy changes, accurate inforination sharing and warnings of

3
4

5

the long-term risks associated with multiple concussions were not recommended by the NFL's so called "expert" committee soon after it& creation in 1994, or even earlier

6

7

by the NFL and/or its "official helmet" manufacturer}, or why it took the NFL 16 years
to even admit that there was a problem is difficult to comprehend.
Equitable Tolling

8

9

10

84.

The applicable statute of limitations is foiled because Defendants'

II

fraudulent concealment of the dangers and adverse e fects of head injuries and

12

.212
etiJZ —>co

concussions made it impossible for Plaintiffs to leam of the hazards to their health,
85. Plaintiffs did not become reasonably aware of the dangerous nature of or

srsc
c

13

14
15

the adverse side effects associated with their head in uries and concussions prior to

JC

JB

I
o

June 2010 when Defendants finally warned any player of the long-term risks

16
vt

associated with multiple concussions, including headaches, dizziness, dementia,

X

17

depression, Alzheimer's disease, CTE and its related symptoms, and death. The
accrual of a complete cause of action relating to the Cognizable physical manifestation of the injury did not exist until that time.
86. Defendants were under a continuing duty to disclose the true nature of

18

19

20
21 22
23

the head injuries and concussions received by Plaintiffs
87. Defendants, in the court of their businesses , concealed and omitted

material key facts about the dangers and adverse effects of head injuries and
concussions received by Plaintiffs, which prevented Plaintiffs from discovering a link between their on-field head injuries and concussions and their long-term physical and
mental health. Because of Defendants' concealment and omission, Defendants are

24

25

26 27
28

estopped from relying on any statute of limitation defense
Johnnie Morton
17

COMPLAINT
760727

1

88.

Plaintiff Johnnie Morton was born on

October 7, 1971, in Inglewood,

2 3

California. He currently lives in Los Angeles, Cali fornia.
89. Plaintiff Johnnie Morton was drafted in the First Round of the NFL

4

Draft, and played for the Detroit Lions from 1994 through2001. Following the 2001

5 6

season, Johnnie Morton joined the Kansas City Chiefs through 2004. In 2005, he
played for the San Francisco 49ers.

7

90.

PlaintiffJohnnie Morton suffered multir)! e

concussions that were

8
9 10

improperly diagnosed and improperly treated througlhout his career as a professional
football player in the NFL.
91. Plaintiff Johnnie Morton was not warned by the NFL, NFL Properties,

11

i Inc. or Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term in|ury due

to football-related

12

S
O

concussions or that the league-mandated equipment did not protect him from such

'5. 13

injury. This was a substantial factor in causing his current injury.
92. Plaintiff Johnnie Morton suffers from

C

c

14

multiple past traumatic brain

I
O

15
16

injuries affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the i
following symptoms: headaches, memory loss, dizziness and depression.
Kez McCorvey

X

17

18

93.

Plaintiff Kez McCorvey was born on Jahuary 23, 1972inGautier,

19

Mississippi. He currently lives in Tallahassee, Florida, with his wife and four
children.

20
21

94.

Plaintiff Kez McCorvey was drafted in tjhe Fifth Round,
1998

and played as a

22
23
24

Receiver for the Detroit Lions from 1995 through
with the Carolina Panthers.

In 1999, he attended camp

95.

PlaintiffKez McCorvey suffered multip|l e

concussions that were

25
26
27

improperly diagnosed and improperly treated througlt^out hiscareer as a professional football player in the NFL.

96.

Plaintiff Kez McCorvey was not warned by the NFL, NFL Properties,

28

Inc. or Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury due to football-related
18 COMPLAINT

760727

1

concussions or that the league-mandated equipment did not protect him from such

2

injury. This was a substantial factor in causing his current injury.

3

97.

Plaintiff Kez McCorvey suffers from mji Itiple past traumatic brain

4

includes but is not limited to the injuries affecting multiple areas of his brain and i

5

following symptoms: headaches, memory loss, blurred vision, tingling in the neck,

6

ringing in the ears, dizziness and depression.
Kurt Barber

7

:

8 9
10

98.

Plaintiff Kurt Barber was born on January 5, 1969, in Kentucky. He

j
i
*
i

currently lives in Campbellsville, Kentucky.
99. Plaintiff Barber played for the New York Jets from 1992 through 1995.

.•
a.
—t -i

11

Beginning in 1997, he attended camp with the Denver., Broncos, was released from
the Broncos and finished camp with the Chicago
Bears

!

1/1

12
13 14

Xi

2
a.
rt jC
'C/l

o

I

1

'
'

«

u

100. Plaintiff Kurt Barber suffered multiple cponcussions that were improperly

!
I

-*
c

oS
C <u
u

diagnosed and improperly treated throughout his career as a professional football
player in the NFL.
101. Plaintiff Kurt Barber was not warned bV the NFL, NFL Properties, Inc.

!

-

i
o

3
T3

15 16
17

X

1

or Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury due to football-related concussions or that the league-mandated equipment ^id not protect him from such

18

|
i

19 20

injury. This was a substantial factor in causing his current injury,
102. Plaintiff Kurt Barber suffers from multible past traumatic brain injuries

21
22
23

affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the following symptoms: short -term memory loss and depression.
Mike Sherrard

;

i
i

J

24

103. Plaintiff Mike Sherrard was born on June 21,1963, in Oakland,

3
i !
i
<

:*
•*
-v

25

California. He currently lives in Calabasas, California

26
27

104. Plaintiff Mike Sherrard played for the Dallas Cowboys beginning in
1986, where he played until 1989. Beginning in 1989 through the 1992 season, Mike

•£

i

28

Sherrard played for the San Francisco 49ers. In 199j} , Sherrard moved to the New
19 COMPLAINT

760727

1

York Giants, and played in New York until approximately 1995. In his final year,
1996, Mike Sherrard played for the Denver Broncos

2

3

105. Plaintiff Mike Sherrard suffered multipl^ concussions that were
improperly diagnosed and improperly treated througljio ut his career as a professional
football player in the NFL.
106. Plaintiff Mike Sherrard was not warned by the NFL, NFL Properties,

4

5

6

7

Inc. or Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury due to football-related concussions or that the league-mandated equipment dad not protect him from such

8

9

injury. This was a substantial factor in causing his ciirrent injury.
Stockar McDougl

10

11

107. Plaintiff Stockar McDougle was born

on

January 11, 1977, in Fort

12
O
(J

Lauderdale, Florida. He currently lives in Parkland,

Florida.

9CO c

13
14

108. Plaintiff Stockar McDougle played for he Detroit Lions from 2000 to

c

2004, the Miami Dolphins in 2005 and the Jacksonvi lie Jaguars in 2006 through
2008.

<u
u

JU

4
O

15

16
l/>

109. Plaintiff Stockar McDougle suffered mik Itiple concussions that were
improperly diagnosed and improperly treated through out his career as a professional
football player in the NFL.
110. Plaintiff Stockar McDougle was not walrned by the NFL, NFL

I

17

18

19

20

21

Properties, Inc. or Riddell Defendants of the risk of iong-term injury due to footballrelated concussions or that the league-mandated equjpment did not protect him from
such injury. This was a substantial factor in causing his current injury,
111. Plaintiff Stockar McDougle suffers
from

22

23

multiple past traumatic brain

24

25

injuries affecting multiple areas of his brain and incliides but is not limited to the VM following symptoms: headaches, memory loss, ringi g in the ears, double and blurred
vision, light sensitivity, sleeplessness and early on set dementia.
Toi Cook

26 27

28

112. Plaintiff Toi Cook was born on December 3, 1964, in Chicago, Illinois.
20
COMPLAINT

760727

I

He currently lives in Westlake Village, California.
113. Plaintiff Toi Cook played for the New Qrleans Saints from 1987 through

2

3

1993. Thereafter, he played for the San Francisco 49ers,, from 1994 to 1995. During
the 1996 and 1997 seasons, Toi Cook played for the Carolina Panthers, 114. Plaintiff Toi Cook suffered multiple concussions that were improperly

4

5
6

diagnosed and improperly treated throughout his career as a professional football
player in the NFL.
115. Plaintiff Toi Cook was not warned by
the

7 8

NFL, NFL Properties, Inc. or

9
10

Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury due to football-related concussions

or that the league-mandated equipment did not protect him from such injury. This
was a substantial factor in causing his current injury
116. Plaintiff Toi Cook suffers from multiple past traumatic brain injuries

II

12

2
O
U

a.

1
08
C

13
14

affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the following
symptoms: sleeplessness.
Brian C. Dudley

C

<u
u

15 16
i/>

117.

Plaintiff Brian C. Dudley was born on

^ugust 30, 1960, in Los Angeles,

o

X

17
18

rnia. California. He currently lives in Los Angeles, California

118. Plaintiff Brian C. Dudley played for the Cleveland, Browns during the
1987 season.

19
20

119. Plaintiff Brian C. Dudley suffered multiple concussions that were

21

improperly diagnosed and improperly treated througlJ(iout his career as a professional
football player in the NFL.

22
23

120. PlaintiffBrian C. Dudley was not warnefd by the NFL, NFL Properties,
Inc. or Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury due to
concussions or that the league-mandated equipment
did

24 25
26

football-related

not protect him from such

injury. This was a substantial factor in causing his current injury, 121. Plaintiff Brian C. Dudley suffers from njiultiple past traumatic brain

27
28

injuries affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the
21

COMPLAINT
760727

1

following symptoms: short-term memory loss, headaphes, blurred vision and sleepdeprived anxiety.
Brad Booth

2 3
4

iele|s , California, 122. Plaintiff Brad Booth lives in Los Ang
lers 123. Plaintiff Brad Booth played for the Oil from

5

1987 to 1988.

6

124. Plaintiff Brad Booth suffered multiple concussions that were improperly

7

diagnosed and improperly treated throughout his career as a professional football
player in the NFL.
125. Plaintiff Brad Booth was not warned by the NFL, NFL Properties, Inc. or

8
9
10

Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury

due to football-related concussions

11

or that the league-mandated equipment did not protect him from such injury. This
was a substantial factor in causing his current injury.
126.

12
Si o
o
™—^

jC

9"

13
14

iltiple Plaintiff Brad Booth suffers from mu

past traumatic brain injuries

e8
c u. C <u jC
u

affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the following
symptoms:
Chris Hale

1
<u
</>


•p
O

15

16

X

17
!8

127. Plaintiff Chris Hale was born on January 4, 1966, in Monrovia,

California. He currently lives in West Covina, Cali folrnia.

19

128. PlaintiffChris Hale played for the Buffalo Bills from 1989 through 1992.
129. Plaintiff Chris Hale suffered multiple concussions that were improperly

20

21

diagnosed and improperly treated throughout his career as a professional football
player in the NFL.
130. Plaintiff Chris Hale was not warned by he NFL, NFL Properties, Inc. or

22

23

24

Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury due to football-related concussions

25

orthat the league-mandated equipment did not protect him from such injury. This
was a substantial factor in causing his current injury.
131. Plaintiff Chris Hale suffers from multip e past traumatic brain injuries

26

27 28

affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the following
22

COMPLAINT
760727

1

symptoms: short-term memory loss.
John Jackson

2

3

132. Plaintiff John Jackson was born on January 2, 1967, in Brooklyn, New

4

York. He currently lives in Diamond Bar, California, with his wife, Ann Frances. 133. Plaintiff John Jackson played for the Arizona Cardinals from 1990
through 1992 and for the Chicago Bears in 1996. 134. Plaintiff John Jackson suffered multiple concussions that were

5

6

7

8

improperly diagnosed and improperly treated throughout his career as a professional
football player in the NFL.

9
10

135. Plaintiff John Jackson was not warned by the NFL, NFL Properties, Inc.

11

or Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury due to football-related

12

concussions or that the league-mandated equipment did not protect him from such

13
—«Si

injury. This was a substantial factor in causing his current injury.
136. Plaintiff John Jackson suffers from multiple past traumatic brain injuries

c

c

14

I
o

15

affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the following
symptoms: short-term memory loss and anxiety.
Dennis Clay

16

<J X

17

18

137. PlaintiffDennis Clay was born on February 5, 1960, in Los Angeles,
California. He currently lives in Cerritos, California, with his wife, Stacey.

19

20

138. PlaintiffDennis Clay attended camp with the Dallas Cowboys in the
1983 pre-season.

21

22

139. During camp, Plaintiff Dennis Clay suffered at least one concussion that
was improperly diagnosed and improperly treated.

23

24

140. Plaintiff Dennis Clay was not warned by the NFL, NFL Properties, Inc. or Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury due to football-related

25
26

concussions or that the league-mandated equipment did not protect him from such
injury. This was a substantial factor in causing his current injury.

27

28

141. Plaintiff Dennis Clay suffers from multiple past traumatic brain injuries
23
COMPLAINT

760727

1

affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the following symptoms: headaches, blurred vision, short-term memory loss and anxiety.
Norman Scott Byeris

2

3

4

142. Plaintiff Norman Scott Byers was born pn July 3, 1968, in Bayonne,

5

New Jersey. He currently lives in Los Angeles, Cali brnia, with his wife, Stephanie,
143. Plaintiff Norman Scott Byers played for the San Diego Chargers from
1982 through 1984. 144. Plaintiff Norman Scott Byers suffered multiple concussions that were

6

7

8
9

improperly diagnosed and improperly treated througihout his career as a professional
football player in the NFL.
145. Plaintiff Norman Scott Byers was not warned by the NFL, NFL

10

11

12
.a

Properties, Inc. or Riddell Defendants of the risk of l^>ng-term injury due to footballrelated concussions or that the league-mandated equipment did not protect him from

o
o «

13

J*
c
c

14

such injury. This was a substantial factor in causing his current injury.
146. Plaintiff Norman Scott Byers suffers
from

0)
U

15
•P
0)

multiple past traumatic brain

16
o

injuries affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the
following symptoms: headaches, short-term memory loss and anxiety.
Darryl Crane

X

17

18

19
20

147. Plaintiff Darryl Crane was born on October 24,1960, in Jacksonville,

Florida. He currently lives in Orlando, Florida. 148. Plaintiff Darryl Crane played for the Pitfsburgh Steelers in the 1983 preseason and the 1987 season.

21

22

23

149. Plaintiff Darryl Crane suffered multiple concussions that were

24

improperly diagnosed and improperly treated throughout his career as a professional
football player in the NFL.

•j

25

26

150. Plaintiff Darryl Crane was not warned by the NFL, NFL Properties, Inc. or Riddell Defendants of the risk of long-term injury
due to football-related

27
28

concussions or that the league-mandated equipment did not protect him from such
24 COMPLAINT

760727

injury. This was a substantial factor incausing his current injury.
2

151. Plaintiff Darryl Crane suffers from multiple past traumatic brain injuries

3

affecting multiple areas of his brain and includes but is not limited to the following symptoms: chronic re-occurring TMJ, pain in the neck, constant headaches, sleep

4

5
6

deprivation, depression, chronic fatigue, dizziness, memory loss, sudden confusion,
blurred vision, diminished hearing, severe joint pain, numbness and stiffness, and loss
of taste sensory.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENCE

7

8

9

10

(As Against The NF1 d.

It

152. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully set
forth herein at length.

v\

12
CL

St

Q
<J

rt sz

13
14

oo

J£ c
u.

<*
c

153. By managing, governing and promoting the game of football, setting and enforcing rules and league policies, regulating team ownership, affirmatively and voluntarily establishing the MTBI to examine the dangers and consequences of concussive brain injuries to NFL players, and by and through its monopoly power in
American football, the NFL assumed a gratuitous independent tort duty to protect the

0)
jC

15

I
•D
u

15

16

O

X

17

18

health and safety of its players, including Plaintiffs, including, but not limited to, a

19

duty to establish and enforce rules that protect its players, a duty to use reasonable
care in researching, studying and/or examining the dangers and risks of concussive

20

21
22

brain injuries and the subsequent damaging effects to its players, a duty to inform and
warn its players of such risks, and a duty to take other reasonable action to minimize
such risks to its players.

23 24

154. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use

25
26

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by failing to enact rules,
policies and regulations to best protect its players, including, but not limited to,

27

mandatory rules that would prevent a player who suffered a concussive brain injury
from returning to play or practice at risk of further injury.
25
COMPLAINT

28

760727

155. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use
2

3
4

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by implementing standardized post-concussion guidelines, which permitted players to return to play or

practice too soon after a concussive brain injury, which were false and misleading,
and which failed to apprise Plaintiffs ofthe risks ofconcussive brain injuries and the
subsequent damaging effects.

5

6 7

156. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use

8 9
10

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by failing to invoke

league-wide guidelines, policies and procedures regarding the identification and
treatment of concussive brain injury, and the return to play after a concussive brain
injury.

11

ft

12
Ol
rt JZ

157. The NFL breached its duty to its players;, including Plaintiffs, to use

Si

o
u
n

13 14

J*

c*
c

C

ID SI
u

4
O

15

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by failing to provide complete, current, and competent information and di rections to NFL physicians, trainers and coaches regarding concussive brain injuries and its prevention, symptoms
and treatment.

16 X
17

158. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use

18

19
20 21 22
23

ordinary care to protect the health and safety ofits players by failing to properly inform or warn its players, including Plaintiffs, and the public ofthe risks of
concussive brain injuries and the subsequent damaging effects.
159. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its pi ayers by failing to ensure

accurate diagnosis and recording of concussive brain injury be taken of its players so
conditions may be treated in an adequate and timely manner. 160. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use

24

25

26
27
28

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its p; ayers by failing to regulate and monitor practices, games, equipment, and medical care so as to minimize the longterm risks associated with concussive brain injuries suffered by its players, including
26

COMPLAINT
760727

Plaintiffs.

161. The NFL breached its duty to its playersi including Plaintiffs, to use
ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by failing to license and approve the best equipment available that will reduce the risk of concussive brain
injury.

162. The NFL breached its duty to its playersi, including Plaintiffs, to use
7 ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by failing to use reasonable
8 care in the manner in which it created the MTBI and in the appointment of physicians
9 to head the MTBI who were not qualified for the job.

10

163. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use

11 ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by failing to use reasonable
jQ

2
rt

12 care in researching, studying and/or examining the risks of head injuries and/or

O
u

jr
CO C c <u
x:

13 concussions in professional football and in downplaying (and in many cases, denying)
14 both the seriousness of such injuries and the clear causal connection between
15 16

I
o

concussions and brain damage.

164. The NFL breached its duty to its players}, including Plaintiffs, to use
care in responding to independent scientific studies on the risk of concussive brain
injuries and the subsequent damaging effects. 165. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use

X

7 ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by failing to use reasonable
18
19 20
21

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by failing to use reasonable care in denying and/or ignoring scientific evidence connecting concussive brain
injuries to the risk of brain disease.

22 23
24 25

166. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by engaging in practices
that restrain the development of good science on the problem of concussion injuries. 167. The NFL breached its duty to its players, including Plaintiffs, to use

26
27
28

ordinarycare to protect the health and safety of its players by failing to prevent its
27
COMPLAINT

760727

players, including Plaintiffs, from being coached, trained and encouraged to use all
portions of their helmets to block, tackle, butt, spear, ram and/or injure opposing players by hitting with their helmeted heads.
168. The NFL breached its duty to its players including Plaintiffs, to use

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its play ers by condoning or failing to

significantly condemn its players, including Plaintiff^ , from using of all portions of
their helmets to block, tackle, butt, spear, ram and/or injure opposing players by
hitting with their helmeted heads.
169. The NFL breached its duty to its players , including Plaintiffs, to use

ordinary care to protect the health and safety of its players by subjecting players,

including Plaintiffs, to an increased risk ofconcussive brain injury,
_l

<A

XI

o
c

12

170. Plaintiffs relied on the NFL's mi srepres^ntations (including

affirmative

O

u j= « —•</>

9C

13 14

misrepresentations and omissions) detailed herein to their detriment,
171. Had the NFL taken the necessary steps to oversee and protect its players,

.* c
U.......

c8

<j

<1>

%

£
41
a

<.

15

including Plaintiffs, by developing and implementin necessary guidelines, policies
and procedures and properly informing, educating and training all persons involved
with the NFL in the recognition, prevention and treatment of concussive brain

i o

16
17

(D X

18
19 20

injuries, then the NFL players, including Plaintiffs, would not have suffered from the
subject condition, would have recovered from the SUl3>ject condition, and/or would not

have suffered the subsequent damaging effects of dii subject condition,
172. Under all of the above circumstances, it was foreseeable that the NFL's

21 22
23

breach of its duties would cause or substantially contribute to the injuries suffered by
Plaintiffs.

24
0
\

173.

The NFL's omissions and commissions collectively and severally,

25
26

constituted negligence.

vl

174. The NFL's negligence was a proximate and producing cause of the

<l

27
28

injuries suffered by Plaintiffs.
175. As a result of Plaintiffs' injuries, they are entitled to damages, as alleged
28 COMPLAINT

760727

1

herein or allowed by law, from the NFL in an amount to be reasonably anticipated to
exceed the jurisdictional minimum of $25,000.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
FRAUD

2

3

4

5 6
7

(As Against The NFL)

176. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if fully set
forth herein at length.

8 9
10

177. Until June 2010, the NFL, through its MTBI, its agents and others, made material misrepresentations (and omissions) to its players, former players, including Plaintiffs, Congress and the public that there was no causal link between concussions and subsequent brain injury, including headaches, dizziness, dementia, depression,
Alzheimer's disease, CTE and death and that NFL players, including Plaintiffs, were

II

12

J3 8
o
CL
nl

_rt
J* c

u

JZ 'CO
c

13 14

not at an increased risk of head injury if they returned to play or practice too soon
after suffering a head injury.

<u
xz
u

S>

15

178. The material misrepresentations were made by agents of the NFL on

"E
o

16 multiple occasions, including, but not limited to MTBI publications, the August 14,
17
18

X

2007 press release and "informational" pamphlets issued to NFL players, and the
November 2008 press statement made by NFL spokesman Aiello.

19
20 21

179. The persons who made the misrepresentations were agents of the NFL
and knew they were false when they were made.

180. The persons who made the misrepresentations, as agents of the NFL,

22 23 24
25

intended to defraud, among others, Plaintiffs in this action and to prevent negative
publicity and increased scrutiny of its medical practices.

181. Plaintiffs, among others, justifiably relied on these misrepresentations to
their detriment in returning to play or practice too soon or not seeking appropriate
medical care after sustaining a head injury. 182. The NFL knew, or should have known, that Plaintiffs would rely on the

26

27

28

NFL's misrepresentations.
29 COMPLAINT

760727

I

183. Plaintiffs, among others, were damaged by these misrepresentations. Among other things, they require increased home costs and pain and suffering.
184. As a result of Plaintiffs' injuries, they
are

2

care

, loss of employment, medical

3
4

entitled to damages, as alleged

5
6

herein or allowed by law, from the NFL in an amount to be reasonably anticipated to
exceed the jurisdictional minimum of $25,000.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT

7

8
9
10

(Against the NFL)

185. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if set fully

11
12
Si

herein at length.
186. The NFL and its MTBI concealed from Plaintiffs the risk of concussive

8
5.
JC
to

O
<J

13

brain injuries and the risk to Plaintiffs if they returned to play or practice too soon
after suffering from a head injury.
187. In particular, the NFL and its MBTI,
throu gh

J* c

08
c

14


_c

I I
o
VI

15

public statements,

16 [published articles, testimony at congressional hearinm s, and the August 14, 2007
17 ["informational" pamphlet (which was issued directly to NFL players), concealed and
ive 18 misrepresented the known long-term risks of concussive brain injuries to NFL 19 players, including Plaintiffs.
20 188. The NFL and its MBTI failed to disclose the clear link between
concealed this information from

o

O X

2t concussions and long-term neurological injuries and

22 its players, including Plaintiffs, with an intent to defijaud Plaintiffs and prevent
23 negative publicity and increased scrutiny of its medi<tal practices,
24 189. The NFL, in managing, governing and promoting the game of football,
re

25 setting and enforcing rules and league policies, and

gulating team ownership, had

26 the duty to disclose the risks faced by its players, inc uding Plaintiffs, relating to

27 [concussive brain injuries received by them during their NFL careers. 28 [ 190. NFL players, including Plaintiffs, relied on the NFL's and the MBTI's
30
COMPLAINT
760727

1

2

3

public statements, published articles, testimony at congressional hearings and/or at least the August 14, 2007 "informational" pamphlet, which was issued directly to all NFL players. Plaintiffs were unaware ofthe true risks of the concussive brain injuries
they sustained during their NFL careers.

4

5
6

191. The NFL knew that Plaintiffs would rely on the inaccurate information in

selecting their course of action (i.e. returning to play or practice too soon or not

7
8

9

seeking appropriate medical care after sustaining a head injury). In issuing the "informational" pamphlet, the NFL stated, "[we want to make sure all N.F.L. players... are fully informed and take advantage of the most up to date information
and resources as we continue to study the long-term impact on concussions."

10
11

192. As a direct and proximate result of the NFL's fraudulent conduct,

12

.2 e
o
u «

Plaintiffs have suffered injuries, including, but not limited to short-term memory loss,
headaches, blurred vision, sleep deprived anxiety and economic loss.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

—>co

1
C

13
14

<8
c

sz

153

15 16

NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
(Against the NFL)

V)

o

X

17

193. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if setfully
herein at length.

18
19

194. The NFL misrepresented the dangers of concussive brain inj uries

20

21

received by its players and the dangers which its players faced in returning to play or practice too quickly after sustaining a head injury. The NFL's MTBI, through public
statements, published articles and the August 14, 2007 "informational" pamphlet,
which it issued directly to all NFL players, misleadingly downplayed the long-term
risks of concussions to NFL players.

22

23
24

25

195. The NFL's material misrepresentations include, but are not limited to:

26

(a)

MBTI articles asserting that returning to play aftera concussion

27
28

"does not involve significant risk of a second injury either in the same game or
during the season"; and
31

COMPLAINT
760727

1

(b)

The NFL's press release and issuance of the August 14, 2007

2

pamphlet to NFL physicians, trainers, coaches and players, asserting that
"Current research with professional athletes hits not shown that having more
than one or two concussions leads to permanent problems... It is important to

3
4

5 6
7

understand that there is no magic number for how many concussions is too
many."

196. The NFL knew or should have known that such statements, articles and

8

pamphlet were false and misleading.

9
10

197. The NFL made these misrepresentations and actively concealed contrary

information with the intent that its players, including Plaintiffs, would rely on the

11

misrepresentations or omissions in selecting their course of action (i.e. returning to

JS|2

12

play or practice too soon ornot seeking appropriate medical care after sustaining a head injury), to prevent negative publicity and to prevent increased scrutiny of its
medical practices.

Silrt;JZ
—>co

13
14


c e

6)
St
u

^
v>

15 16

198. Plaintiffs did not know, nor should Plaintiffs have known, that the NFL's
statements were false or misleading.

O

X

17
18

199. Plaintiffs reasonably relied upon the misrepresentations of the NFL in

selecting their course of action during and after their NFL careers to their detriment.
200. As a direct and proximate result of the NFL's fraudulent conduct,

19
20

Plaintiffs have suffered injury, including, but not limited to, short-term memory loss,

21 [headaches, blurred vision, sleep deprived anxiety and economic loss.
22
23

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

STRICT LIABILITY FOR DESIGN DEFECT
(As Against Riddell)

24
25

201. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if set
forth herein at length.

26 27
28

202. Riddell designs, manufactures, sells and distributes football equipment,

including helmets, to the NFL, and has been the official helmet provider of the NFL
32 COMPLAINT

760727

i

since 1989.

2

203. At the time the helmets were designed, manufactured, sold and

3 distributed by Riddell, the helmets were defective in design, unreasonably dangerous,
4 and unsafe for their intended purpose because they
did

not provide adequate

5 [protection against the foreseeable risk ofconcussive brain injury.
6 includes, but is not limited to, the following:

The design defect

7 8
9

(a)

Negligently failing to design the Subject helmet with a safe means

of attenuating and absorbing the foreseeable forces of impact in order to
minimize and/or reduce the forces and energy directed to the player's head;

10

(b)

Negligently designing the subject helmet with a shock attenuating

11
Si

system which was not safely configured for all portions of the helmets
reasonably foreseen to be used by players;

8
x:
co

12

o
u

13
14

(c)
model;

Negligently failing to properly and adequately test the helmet

o5
c
C

0)
.c
u

I
V
V)

is
16
17
18

(d)

Negligently failing to warn playe1"S , including Plaintiffs, that their

"D
1_

helmets would not protect against the long tenn health consequences of
concussive brain injury resulting from reason ably
by players; and
foreseen uses of the helmets

O

X

19
20

(e)

Other acts of negligence that may be discovered during the course

of this matter.

21

204. At all times, the helmets were used for the purpose for which they were

22 intended. All portions of the helmets were used by flayers, including Plaintiffs, to
23 block, tackle, butt, spear, ram and/or injure opposing players by hitting with their
24 helmeted heads. Such use was reasonably foreseeab 25
e to Riddell.

205. Riddell is strictly liable for designing a defective and unreasonably

including Plaintiffs, of the 26 dangerous product and for failing to warn players, i
27 defective design and unreasonably dangerous 28
condition of the helmets,

206. The defective design and unreasonably dangerous condition of the
33
COMPLAINT

760727

I

helmets and Riddell's failure to warn were proximate and substantial causes of Plaintiffs' injuries and other damages, including, but not limited to, economic and
non-economic damages.

2
3 4

207. A safer alternative design was economically and technologically feasible

5

at the time the product was designed, manufactured, sold and distributed by Riddell.
208. As a result of Plaintiffs' injuries, Plainti

6

7

Riddell in an amount reasonably anticipated to exceep the jurisdiction minimum of
$25,000.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENCE

8
9

10

11

(As Against Riddell)

I/I

12
a.
a

209. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if set
forth herein at length.

Si

o
o
—••.

si CO

13
14

<8
c
c

210. Riddell designs, manufactures, sells and distributes football equipment,

<D
_c

I
1_

15
16

including helmets, to the NFL, and has been the official helmet provider of the NFL
since 1989. In 1997, Riddell became a part of the NFL's MTBI project of assessing

JO

«/>

o

X

17

concussions and health consequences to NFL players by analyzing and reconstructing

18

head impacts. In 2006, Riddell undertook a study appearing inNeurosurgery that was
co-authored by members of the MTBI. The study touted Riddell's "Revolution"

19

20 21 22

helmet as reducing the risk of concussions in over 2,000 high school athletes in
Western Pennsylvania.

211. As such, Riddell has the duty to provide necessary and adequate safety and instructional materials, warnings and means to reduce and/or minimize the risks
associated with concussive brain injuries sustained by players, including Plaintiffs, while playing football and while wearing Riddell's helmets.

23

24 25 26
27

212. Riddell failed to provide the necessary and adequate safety and
instructional materials, warnings and means to reduce and/or minimize the risks associated with concussive brain injuries sustained by players, including Plaintiffs,
34
COMPLAINT

28

760727

i

while playing football and while wearing Riddell's helmets
213. As a result of Riddell's breach of duty,

2

plaintiffs have suffered injuries,

3

including, but not limited to, short-term memory loss , headaches, blurred vision, sleep
deprived anxiety and economic loss. •

4

5

214. As a result of Plaintiffs' injuries, Plaintiffs are entitled to damages from

6
7 8

Riddell in an amount reasonably anticipated to exceed the jurisdictional minimum of
$25,000.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF AUCTION
FAILURE TO WAFIN

9 10

(As Against Riddel )

11

215. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if set
forth herein at length.

12
Si

o
u

a.

JC 10 <* c
C <u x:
u

13 14

216. Riddell designs, manufactures, sells and distributes football equipment,

including helmets, to the NFL, and has been the official helmet provider of the NFL
since 1989.

15
TJ
0>
v>

16
O

217. At the time the helmets were designed, manufactured, sold and

X

7 idistributed by Riddell, Riddell knew or should have known of the substantial dangers
18 involved in the reasonably foreseeable uses of the helmets.
19 218. The risks involved in the reasonably foreseeable uses of the helmets

20 presented a substantial danger to users of the helmetk, including Plaintiffs.

21
23

219. Ordinary consumers, including Plaintiffs, would not have recognized or
the helmets.

22 known the potential risks and dangers involved in the reasonably foreseeable uses of

24
•:S

220. Riddell knew that these substantial danger:s were not readily recognizable

25 to ordinary consumers, including Plaintiffs, and that such persons, including
26 Plaintiffs, would use the helmets without inspection for defects.

27

221. Riddell failed to adequately warn (and ijnstruct) users ofthe helmets, i

28 including Plaintiffs, of the risks involved in the reason ably foreseeable uses of the
35

COMPLAINT
760727

i

helmets.

2

222. At all times, the helmets were used for

the

purpose for which they were

3
4

intended. All portions of the helmets were used by player:s, including Plaintiffs, to
block, tackle, butt, spear, ram and/or injure opposing players by hitting with their
helmeted heads. Such use was reasonably foreseeable
223.
to Riddell.
in As a result of the lack of sufficient warn ings and/or

5
6

instructions,

7

Plaintiffs suffered injuries and damages, including, but not limited to, economic and
non-economic damages.
instructions was a substantial 224. The lack of sufficient warnings and/or i

8

9 10
II

factor in causing Plaintiffs' injuries and other damag;es.
225. As a result of Plaintiffs' injuries and

dajnages, Plaintiffs are entitled to

12
Si

damages from Riddell in an amount reasonably antidipated to exceed the jurisdiction
minimum of $25,000.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENCE

o
u

a.

13
o8

—«/l
c

C <u
sz
u

14

<u

15

16

(As Against NFL Properties)
226. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as if set
forth herein at length.

J3

o

X

17 18

19

227. NFL Properties is engaged in, among other activities, the approving of

20 21
22

licensing and the promotion of equipment used by all NFL teams and NFL players,
including Plaintiffs. As such, NFL Properties has a ^uty to ensure that the equipment
it licensed and approved were of the highest possible: quality and were sufficient to

23
24

protect the NFL players, including Plaintiffs, from
concussive brain injuries.

the risks associated with

'.i

25
26

ing icensin Riddell's helmets and 228. f :i;L Properties breached its duty by li

approving and/or requiring the use of Riddell's helrhets by the NFL players, including
Plaintiffs, while knowing, or having reason to know,
that the helmets were

27
28

negligently and defectively designed and/or manufactured
36

COMPLAINT
760727

229. As a result of these breaches by NFL Properties, Plaintiffs suffer injuries
2

and the effects of concussive brain injuries, including, but not limited to, short-term

3
4

memory loss, headaches, blurred vision, sleep deprived anxiety and economic loss.
230. As a result of Plaintiffs' injuries, Plaintiffs are entitled to damages from

5

NFL Properties in an amount reasonably anticipated to exceed the jurisdictional
minimum of $25,000.

6 7

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
LOSS OF CONSORT] UM

8
9 10
11

(As Against All Defendants)

231. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs as ifset
forth herein at length.

12
jQ

232. As a direct and proximate result of the carelessness, negligence and
recklessness of all Defendants and of the aforesaid injuries to their husbands, Octavia

O
U
a

a.
a

13
14

—«</i J* c

a
c <u sz
(J

McDougle, Kristine Cook, Ann Frances Jackson, Stacey Clay and Stephanie Byers
ed (collectively the "Wife Plaintiffs") have been damage as follows:

<u

15
•o

<D
VI

16
o

(a)

They have been and will continue to be deprived of the services,
They have been and will continue to be required to spend money for

(J X

17

assistance, protection, affection, society and companionship of their husbands;
(b)

18

19
20

medical care and household care for the treatment of their husbands

(c)

They have been and will continue to be peprived of the earnings of their

21

husbands.

22
23

233. As a result of their husbands' injuries, the Wife Plaintiffs are entitled to
damages from the Defendants, in an amount reasonably anticipated to exceed the
jurisdiction miminum of $25,000.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

24
25

26 27
28

WHERCFORE, Plaintiffs pray forjudgment against Defendants, and each of
them, as follows:

1.

For compensatory and general damages according to proof;
37

COMPLAINT
760727

2. 3.

For special and incidental damages according to proof; For punitive damages where applicable;

4.
5.

For costs ofthe proceedings herein, including reasonable attorneys' fees,
For all such other and further relief as the
JURY DEMAND

to the extent permitted by law; and Court deems just,

Plaintiffs tiereby demand a trial by jury on all ilaims so triable.

DATED: May ^L, 2012
10

GLASER WEI FINK JACOBS HOWARD AVCHEN & SHAPIRO llp

11
a.
-j

By:
12 13

-j

FRED D. HEATHER TiEI

_r_LMAtmMl

jQ

1.

O

Gi
rt

ADAM LEBERTHON

sz —•</•» .* c
a.
.

<*
C

MARY ANN T. NGUYEN
14

o

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
15 16
17

<u

>

£
«_

(V
(S3

O

(D I

18 19
20

21 22 23 24

:8
*\

25

•j
• •!'

76

27
28 38 COMPLAINT
760727

ORIGINAL,
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY («»,«, „«f« Bat number, and address):
FOR COURT use ONLY

"Mary Ann T. Nguyen {SBN 269099)
GLASER WEIL FINK JACOBS HOWARD AVCHEN & SHAPIRO LLP 10250 CONSTELLATION BOULEVARD, 1STH FLOOR LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067
TELEPHONE NO.: FAXNO.: 310-556-2920 attorney for M~n*>- PLAINTIFFS JOHNNIE MORTON. ET AL . SUPERIOR COURT OFCALIFORNIA, COUNTY OFLOS ANGELES
street address: 111 NORTH HILL STREET
MAILING ADDRESS:

Superior Court of California

FILED

County of Los Angeles

CITY AND ZIP CODE: LOS ANGELES

90012

BRANCH NAME: CENTRAL

MAY 21 2012 John A. Cjarlje, Executive Officer/Clerk
ET AL.
CASE NUMBER:

CASE NAME:

MORTON,

ET AL. V. NFL,

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET

Complex Case Designation

fxl Unlimited
(Amount
demanded

Limited
(Amount
deman '<.

[""""I Counter

CD Joinder
JUDGE:
DEPT:

BC465131

exceeds $25,000)

$25,000

Filed with first appearance by defendant (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.402)
that best describes this case:
Contract

"-5below must be completed (see instructions on page 2)
1. Check one box below for the ca
Auto Tort

Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation
(Cil., Rules of Court, rules 3.400-3.403)

HAuto (22) Uninsured motorist (46) Other PI/PD/WD (Personal Injury/;1* jporly Damage/Wrongful Death! Tort

I I
I

)Breach ofcontract/warranty (06) IRule 3.740 collections(09)
[ Insurance coverage (18)

I , IOther collections (09)

I
[ I

1Asbestos (04)
1Medical malpractice (45) IOther PI/PD/WD (23)

l~~l Other contract (37)
Real Property

fie"] Product liability (24}

I

I Eminent domain/Inverse
condemnation (14)

CD CD en • CD CD

Antitrust/Trade regulation (03)
Construction defect (10) Mass tort (40) Securities litigation (28) Environmental/Toxic tort (30)

Insurance coverage claims arising from the
above listed provisionally complex case types (41)

Non-PI/PD/WO (Other) Tort

I

I I
1

IBusinesstort/unfair business practice (07) ICivil rights (08)
I Defamation (13)

| Wrongful eviction (33) I ~1 Other real property (26)
I | Commercial (31)

Enforcement of Judgment
Enforcement of judgment (20)
Miscellaneous Civil Complaint

Unlawful Detainer

I
i I I
I

IFraud (16)
IIntellectual property (19)
] Professional negligence (25)

f~l Residential (32) I IDrugs (38)
Judicial Review

CD RICO (27) CD Other complaint (not specified above) (42)
Miscellaneous Civil Petition

IOthernon-PI/PD/WD tort(35)
| Wrongful termination (36)

I

| Asset forfeiture (05)

Employment

|

| Petition re: arbitration award(11)

CD Partnership and corporate governance (21) CD Other petition (notspecirwdabove) (43)

j
[

| Writ of mandate (02)
[ Other judicial review(39)

I , IOther employment (15)

This case

I

I is

[ID is not complex underrule 3.400 ofthe California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the
d. I I Large number of witnesses

factors requiring exceptional judicial management:

a. I I Large number of separately represented parties

b. I

I Extensive motion practice raising difficult ornovel e. I issues that will be time-consuming to resolve

I Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court

c. I

I Substantial amount of cocumentaryevidence

3. Remedies sought (check ail that apt
4. Number of causes of action (spec :?y

a. QD monetary b. CD nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief c. QT] punitive
^se form CM-015)
yffjWTYOp ATTORNEYEQBJgAffITY)

f. I_ ISubstantial postjufoIgment judicial supervision

5. Thiscase CD is
Date:

CD is r,o»

a class action suit.

6. If there are any known related c

«~ file and serve a notice of related case. (You ma.

Mary Ann T. Nguyen (SBN 269099)
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME)


NOTICE

(SIGNATURE Ol

• Plaintiff must file this cov -i s,nt

under the Probate Code, < -"n"/ r • •, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.220.) Failure to file may result

, the first paper filed in the action orproceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed
cover sheet required by local court rule.

in sanctions. • File this cover sheet in add'tion ' -

• If this case is complex un.W i other parties to the action or r-r
« Unless this is a collections catc ,
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use
Judicial Council of California

3et seq. ofthe California Rules ofCourt, you mu^t serve a copy ofthis cover sheet on all
it rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet wil be used for statistical purposes only.
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET
Pige 1 of 2
Cal. Rules of Court, rules 2.30, 3.220. 3.400-3.403. 3.740: Cal. Standards of Judicial Administration, std. 3.10

CM-010[R«v. July 1. 2007)

sx

ORIGINAL
SHORT TITLE:
CASE NUMBER

MORTON, ET AL. V. NfL, ET AL.

RH485131
STATEMENT OF LOCATION

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND

(CERTIFICATE OF GROUNDS FOR ASSIGNMENT TO COURTHOUSE LOCATION)
This form is required pursuant to Local Rule 2.0 in all new civil case filings in the Los Angeles Superior Court.

Item I. Check the types of hearing and fill in the estimated length of hearing expected

for this case:

JURY TRIAL? Sj YES CLASS ACTION? D YES LIMITED CASE? CIYES TIME ESTIMATED FOR TRIAL 14

p HOURS/ H DAYS

Item II. Indicate the correct distric' md courthouse location (4 steps - Ifyou checked "Limited Case", skip to Item III, Pg. 4):
il Step 1: After first ccmpleiin s) Civil Case Cover Sheet form, find the main Civil Case Cover Sheet heading for your Sheet case type you selected. case in the left margin beio •/. nd, to the right in Column A, the Civil Case Cover

Step 2: Check one Superior Court type ofaction inColumn B below which best describes the nature of this case.
Step 3: In Column C, circle she reason for the courtlocation choice that applies to the type of action you have
checked. For any exception to the court location, see Local Rule 2.0.

Applicable V sons for Choosing Courthouse Location (se<s Column C below)
1. Class actions must be fiM in '

2. May be filed in centra! to*

r

-ley Mosk Courthouse, central district. .,r no bodily injury/property damage).
•iamage occurred. it defendant resides.

6. Location of property or permanently garaged vehicle.
7. Location wriere petitioner resides. 8. Location wherein defendant/respondent functions wholly, 9. Location wtiere one or more of the parties reside.
10. Location of Labor Commissioner Office

4. Location where bodily \rvurj, <'
5. Location where perfarn

3. Location where cause ot aaicn £ «s

Step 4: Fill in the infer

iuested on page 4 in Item III; complete Item IV. Sign the declaration.

Civil Case Cover Sr.

: Applicable Reasons :-

.

»Caiegc>y No
Auto (22;

Sse^te^AtSove'l
1„2„ 4.
1„ 2., 4.

U A7100 Motor Vehicle- Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death

o

*•

<

*-

Uninsured Motorist (

D A7110 Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death - Uninsured Motorist
Q A6070 Asbestos Property Damage A7221 Asbestos - Personal InjuryA/Vrongful Death

Asbestos


<U O Q. t -

S •*=
Ou

Product Liability (2

21 A7260 Product Liability (not asbestos or toxic/environmental)
D A7210 Medical Malpractice - Physicians & Surgeons
A7240 Other Professional Health Care Malpractice

1..2..3..4..8. 1.,4.
1..4.

<B
41

•2. 5
<•— CD

Medical Malpracri

D

8*
01 «

O
Other

A7250 Premises Liability (e.g., slip and fall)
assault, vandalism, etc.)

1..4.
1..4.

* * 1
\ JC <0

i S °

Personal Injury Property Damage Wrongfui Death (23;

D A7230 Intentional Bodily Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death (e.g.,
u A7270 Intentional infliction of Emotional Distress

1., 3.
1.. 4.

D A7220 Other Personal Injury/Property DamageAVrotigful Death

LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11)

:iVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM

Local Rule 2.0

LASC Approved 03-04

AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

Page 1 of 4

•I

SHORT TITIE:

;e nu jb(

MORTON ETAL

:tal

"•' CiWlCaseCo a
Business T

-V Category N».

\

• t'i * ,h;^
D

'W J,i!\$*»W\ ^Ijyp^^ctJonMflji
» "* , (Check only*one) •;«:!•>

llllliili!

||iSeeStep^Above
1., 3. 1,2., 3.

wpplicabielReasons.-.

A6029 Other Commercial/Business Tort (not fraud/breach of contract)

S.|r

Civil Rights (Q8)

O A6005 Civil Rights/Discrimination •
a

Defamation (13)

A6010 Defamation (slander/libel)
A6013 Fraud (no contract)

1., 2.. 3. 1..2..3.

ft
o 3

Fraud (16)

£-5
Professional Negligence

A6017 Legal Malpractice

1,2., 3.
1„ 2, 3. 2„3.

5 <9 e O
z a

A6050 Other Professional Malpractice (not medical o|rlegal)
n
U

Other'

A6025 Other Non-PersonalInjury/Property Damage fort
A6037 Wrongful Termination

Wrongful 11
E
>. o a.

1..2..3.
1..2..3.
10.

CI A6024 Other Employment Complaint Case Other Employment (H;)
LI A6109 Labor Commissioner Appeals

£
tu

.A6004 Breach ofRental/Lease Contract (not unlawful detainer or wrongful
eviction)
Breach of Contract/ Warranty (06) (not insurance)

2., 5.

A6008 Contract/Warranty Breach -Seller Plaintiff (no fraud/negligence) A6019 Negligent Breach of Contract/Warranty (no fraud)
A6028 Other Breach of ContractVWarranty (not fraud or negligence)
n A6002 Collections Case-Setler Plaintiff

2., 5. 1,2.5. 1..2..5.

2., 5., 6. 2., 5. 1., 2., 5„8. 1,2,3,5.

Collections fCi
o

n
Insurance Gov

A6Q12 Other Promissory Note/Collections Case

u

D A6015 Insurance Coverage (not complex)
n

A6009 Contractual Fraud A6031 Tortious Interference

Other Cori"""' j'2

1., 2„ 3., 5. 1,2., 3., 8.

A6027 Other Contract Dispute(not breach/insuranceffraud/negligence)
Eminent Dom^ rt i ,<.i~

Condemnation (141

J

A7300 Eminent Domain/Condemnation

Number of parcels.
2., 6. 2., 6. 2., 6.
2., 6.

a.

Wrongful Eviction (33)

(J A6023 Wrongful Eviction Case
O A6018 Mortgage Foreclosure

P

«

Other Real FV t

1

AS032 Quiet Title

A6060 Other Real Property(not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure)
Unlawful Deta n>

] A6021 Unlawful Detainer-Commercial (not drugs or wrongful eviction)
A6020 Unlawful Detainer-Residential (not drugs or wrongful eviction)

2,6.

w'i
Unlawful D.

2„6.

? 1
\ 3

Unlawful D '

Post-Fore-; I
Unlawful D.'

. (

a

A6020F Unlawful Detainer-Post-Foreclosure

2., 6.

A6022 Unlawful Detainer-Drugs

2., 6.

LACIV109 (Rev. 03/11)

LASC Approved Q3-04

,'IL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

Local Rule 2.0

Page 2 of 4

SHORT TITLE:

CASE NUMBER

' MORTON, ET AL. V. NFL, ET AL.

*Civil Case* C

t

'

;!&ate^
Asset Fo

A6108 Asset Forfeiture Case

2

6

Petition re Ari

A6115 Petition to Compel/ConfirnWacate Arbitratior
D A6151 Writ - Administrative Mandamus

2., 5. 2., 8.
2.
2.

2

Writ of Mandate (CC)

ID A6152 Writ- Mandamus on LimitedCourt Case Matter
! A6153 Writ - Other Limited Court Case Review A6150 Other Writ /Judicial Review

Other Judical Pf,

w

2., 8.

Antitrust/Trade k
o

u'.

003 Antitrust/Trade Regulation
A6007 Construction Defect

1..2..8.
1.2., 3.

H
o>



X

Construction DW
Claims Invt,, n

£
Q.

C A9006 Claims Involving Mass Tort
. A6035 Securities Litigation Case
A6036 Toxic Tort/Environmental

1,2.8.

E
o

o
«

Securities L
Tc

1,2., 8.

c
o

1..2..3..8.

"«>

Environiii

Ju

1

a.

Insurance Co/emc .

from Com,' v

-

n

A6014 Insurance Coverage/Subrogation (complex case only)

1..2..5.,
2„9.
2.. 6.

3 A6141 Sister State Judgment
c e

3 A6160 Abstract of Judgment
Enf
of Juc

§ 6 s -g1
c --

) AS107 Confession of Judgment (non-domestic relations)
j A6140 Administrative Agency Award (not unpaid taxes)

2., 9.
2., 8. 2„ 8.

UJ

o

i A6114 Petition/Certificate forEntry of Judgment on ynpaid Tax
3
Rico (;;•••;

A6112 Other Enforcement of Judgment Case

2., 8., 9.
1..2..8.
1., 2., 8.

D

A3033 Racketeering (RICO) Case A6030 Declaratory Relief Only

si
.2 E

• 5
<i> as

Other'

A6040 Injunctive Relief Only (notdomestic/harassmbnt)
A6011 Other Commercial Complaint Case (non-tort/non-complex) / 6000 Other Civil Complaint (non-tort/non-complex]

2„ 8. 1,2., 8.

(Not Spect»

a

o

*

1„ 2., 8.

Partnership Cotj of >.
Governcnce C1s

A6113 Partnership and Corporate Governance Case
A6121 Civil Harassment

2,8.

2., 3.. 9.
2., 3., 9.

«2

</)

AS123 Workplace Harassment

A6124 Elder/Dependent Adult Abuse Case
=5 OS O
Other Petitions

2., 3., 9.
2.

(Not Specified Aix (43)

A6190

Election Contest

A6110 Petition for Change of Name
A6170 Petition for Relief from Late Claim Law
A6100 Other Civil Petition

2., 7.

2., 3., 4., 8.
2,9.

LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) LASC Approved 03-04

VIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

Local Rule 2.0

Page 3 of 4

SHORT TITLE:

CASE NU WBER

MORTON, ET AL. V. NFL, ET AL.

Item III. Statement of Location: F
circumstance indicated in Item !!

le address of the accident, party's residence or place of business, performance, or other p 3 on Page 1, as the proper reason forfiling; in the court location you selected.
ADDRESS:

REASON: Check the appropriate (•
under Column C for the type of cthis case.

the numbers shown

131 PALOS VERDES BOULEVARD

/an have selected for

Q1.D2. D3.04. OS. D6.
CITY:

D8. D9.D10.
ZIP COOE;

REDONOO BEACH

90277

Item IV. Declaration of • „s , •
and correct and that t >- :

under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true I n-tler is properly filed for assignment to the SUPERIOR

courthouse in the

CENTRAL

D-„ ,-<•

r-Tior Court ofCalifornia, County ofLos Angeles [podeCiv. Proc, § 392et seq., and Local

Rule 2.0, subds. (b), (c) and (d;|.

Dated: __5/5J/<?'
WURE (SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY/FILII* PARfY)

PLEASE HAVE THE FOLLOWiNC COMMENCE YOUR NEW COURT

EMS COMPLETED AND READY TO BE FILED IN ORDER TO PROPERLY
ASE:

1. 2.
3.

Original Comp'"-"'itr'-' If filing a Corni t
Civil Case Cov-

'

-' Summons form for issuance by the Clerk.
I Council form CM-010.

4.

Civil Case Cove- ^«

Sum and Statement of Location form, LACIV 109, LASC Approved 03-04 (Rev.
unless fees have been waived.

03/11). 5. Payment in full ^*fh

6.
7.

A signed order <,,
minor under 18 yeart • ' Additional copic-r, of > ~
must be served alon - v

Guardian ad Litem, Judicial Council form CtvJoiO, ifthe plaintiff or petitioner isa

ill be required by Court in order toissue a summons.

-,'s to be conformed by the Clerk. Copies of trie cover sheet and this addendum summons and complaint, or other initiating pleading in the case.

LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11)
LASC Approved 03-04

IL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

Local Rule 2.0

Page 4 of 4