A recent Legal Intelligencer story, “Ex-NFL Players Sue Lawyers Over Fees in Concussion Case,” reports that former professional football ­players involved in the NFL concussion litigation have sued their former ­attorneys in federal court over liens placed or intended to be placed on the players' individual cuts of the league's $1 billion settlement.

In their complaint, the seven plaintiffs—Gale Sayers, Lem Barney, Thomas Skladany, Thomas Vaughn, Jerry Rush, Kenneth Callicutt and Eric Hipple—asked the court to declare that the law firms formerly representing them in the concussion litigation are not entitled to liens on the players' recovery.  Sayers and Barney are members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

The firms sued are Hausfeld; Zimmerman Reed; Locks Law Firm; Bondurant Mixson & Elmore; and Pope McGlamry.

The players allege that they terminated their respective firms' handling of their individual cases over dissatisfaction with the representation they received.

"Defendant law firms' efforts on ­plaintiffs' cases have been expended exclusively in furtherance of the NFL concussion class action litigation for which some of defendant law firms will be richly compensated," the complaint said.  "But, based on information and belief, defendant law firms have made no substantive efforts in furtherance of plaintiffs' ­individual monetary award claims under the settlement agreement, which is why plaintiffs ­terminated the relationships with the defendant firms."

Michael Leh, managing partner of Locks Law Firm, said in a statement, "Locks Law Firm had not asserted an attorneys' lien against the former player in this complaint who we represented; although we did do work on the case we would never assert a claim for fees that was not justified."

"No law firm represents more individual former players in this litigation than we do," he continued, "and no other firm has spent more time, effort and money than Locks Law Firm in order to obtain the maximum award possible for each of our individual clients both under the terms of the settlement agreement and through every other available avenue."

Specifically, the complaint alleged that Locks, which represented Skladany, has not filed a lien, but could; Hausfeld, which represented Barney and Sayers, has threatened liens against their proceeds; Zimmerman Reed, which represented Vaughn and Rush, threatened liens against their proceeds; Bondurant Mixson, which represented Callicutt, filed a lien against his proceeds; and Pope McGlamry, which represented Hipple, filed a lien against his proceeds.

The players said in their complaint that the firm Cummings, McClorey, Davis, & Acho currently represents them in the concussion litigation, and is entitled to the fee recovery because of its work in hiring neurologists and experts, reviewing medical records, and preparing documents.

Arthur Goldman, the Paoli-based attorney who filed the plaintiffs' case, said the Cummings firm would soon enter its ­appearance in the players' suit against their former representation.

Recently, objectors to the NFL's $1 billion settlement petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit to reconsider its decision to uphold the settlement by holding en banc argument.

Earlier this month the appeals court—over the objections of dozens of former NFL players—affirmed a lower court holding that the settlement was adequate compensation for players suffering from an array of brain injuries, including Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases.

The roughly 90 players took issue with the settlement—reached in April 2015 after extended debate—because it didn't include payment for players diagnosed with chronic traumatic ­encephalopathy (CTE).

But despite those players' objections, Third Circuit Judge Thomas L. Ambro wrote in the court's opinion that there is no such thing as a perfect settlement.

The objectors "aim to ensure that the claims of retired players are not given up in exchange for anything less than a generous settlement agreement negotiated by very able representatives," Ambro said.  "But they risk making the perfect the enemy of the good.  This settlement will provide nearly $1 billion in value to the class of retired players.  It is a testament to the players, researchers, and advocates who have worked to expose the true human costs of a sport so many love. Though not perfect, it is fair."  The settlement provides compensation for approximately 20,000 former players.

Ambro also addressed NFL ­executive vice president Jeffrey Miller's statement before a congressional committee in March that a link existed between football and degenerative brain disorders like CTE; a statement that some objectors argued was the NFL admitting that CTE was an issue, yet still refusing to compensate the disease.

The judge said that even if Miller's ­statement did boil down to an admission by the league that football and CTE are linked, it still doesn't mean the settlement was unfair.  Additionally, he said that the research on CTE is still in its infancy.

The concussion litigation has been marked by disagreement among the players' lawyers since the first iterations of the settlement.
  U.S. District Judge Anita Brody of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, who has handled the case, rejected the first deal the parties struck for $760 million just over a year-and-a-half ago and sent them back to the drawing board.  The lead counsel for the players and the lawyers for the NFL came back in the summer of 2014 with a second deal that did away with the $675 million cap on the fund from which injured former players would draw—the judge's chief concern was that there wouldn't be enough money in the fund to compensate all eligible players over the 65-year life of the fund.