Quote:
Originally Posted by 30gut
C'mon bro i'm not gonna do the research for you....but the collusion had to go before arbitrage BEFORE moving forward the arbitrator could have decided the case was without merit and it would have ended right there.
|
So the arbitrator said that the case could be heard right? from an SI article:
Quote:
Kaepernick is by no means guaranteed to win the trial
While Kaepernick is no doubt thrilled by Burbank’s summary judgment ruling, the ruling doesn’t guarantee that Burbank will ultimately rule in Kaepernick’s favor. Under Article 17 of the CBA, the burden of persuasion for a summary judgment is whether Kaepernick has shown enough evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact. In contrast, the burden of persuasion for Kaepernick to prevail in the trial is whether he demonstrates by a “clear preponderance of evidence” that collusion occurred and that such collusion caused him economic injury.
The phrase “clear preponderance” reflects a high standard of persuasion. It is a burden decidedly higher than the “preponderance of evidence” or “more likely than not” burden used in civil trials.
|
Do your own research and understand what
innocent until PROVEN guilty is supposed to mean.
Our country is never going to survive the internet morality police...