Court rules to re­in­state sus­pen­sion of El­liott

The Columbus Dispatch - - Sports - By Schuyler Dixon

FRISCO, Texas — A fed­eral ap­peals court cleared the way Thurs­day for the NFL to im­pose a six-game sus­pen­sion on Dal­las Cow­boys star run­ning back Ezekiel El­liott over do­mes­tic vi­o­lence al­le­ga­tions, sid­ing with the league in the lat­est high­pro­file fight over its abil­ity to pun­ish play­ers for off-field be­hav­ior.

In a 2-1 de­ci­sion, the 5th U.S. Cir­cuit Court of Ap­peals panel in New Or­leans granted the league’s emer­gency re­quest to set aside an in­junc­tion and or­dered a district court in Texas to dis­miss El­liott’s case.

The NFL an­nounced that the sus­pen­sion was ef­fec­tive im­me­di­ately, though fur­ther ap­peals were pos­si­ble and the Cow­boys are not play­ing this week­end.

“We are cur­rently ex­plor­ing all of our le­gal op­tions and will make a de­ci­sion as to what is the best course of ac­tion in the next few days,” El­liott at­tor­ney Frank Salzano said.

The Cow­boys don’t play again un­til next Oct. 22, at San Fran­cisco. If El­liott’s le­gal team can’t put the sus­pen­sion on hold again, he won’t be el­i­gi­ble to play un­til Nov. 30 at home against Wash­ing­ton. El­liott played the first five games as Dal­las went 2-3 in a dis­ap­point­ing start.

A fed­eral judge in Texas is­sued the in­junc­tion block­ing the sus­pen­sion last month, agree­ing with NFL play­ers’ union at­tor­neys who ar­gued that the in­ves­ti­ga­tion of the al­le­ga­tions in Colum­bus and a sub­se­quent ap­peal were un­fair to El­liott, a for­mer Ohio State stand­out.

The NFL coun­tered that it fol­lowed pro­ce­dures un­der the league’s la­bor deal and that the union im­prop­erly filed a law­suit be­fore the ap­peals process was com­plete.

“The NFLPA is re­view­ing the de­ci­sion and con­sid­er­ing all op­tions,” the play­ers’ union said in a state­ment Thurs­day. “The ap­pel­late court de­ci­sion fo­cuses on the ju­ris­dic­tional is­sues. The fail­ures of due process by the NFL ar­tic­u­lated in the District Court’s de­ci­sion were not ad­dressed.”

The most likely des­ti­na­tion for fur­ther le­gal chal­lenges from play­ers’ union at­tor­neys rep­re­sent­ing El­liott is with the South­ern District of New York. The NFL filed in that fed­eral court af­ter El­liott’s ap­peal through the league was de­nied by ar­bi­tra­tor Harold Hen­der­son last month.

Last year’s NFL rush­ing leader as a rookie, El­liott was sus­pended in Au­gust by Com­mis­sioner Roger Good­ell af­ter the league con­cluded fol­low­ing a year­long in­ves­ti­ga­tion that he had sev­eral phys­i­cal con­fronta­tions in the sum­mer of 2016 with Tif­fany Thomp­son, his girl­friend at the time.

Pros­e­cu­tors in Colum­bus de­cided not to pur­sue the case, cit­ing con­flict­ing ev­i­dence.

El­liott, who set a Dal­las rookie fran­chise record with 1,631 yards rush­ing last sea­son, is fourth in the NFL with 393 yards this year. He had a sea­son-high 116 yards in a 35-31 loss to Green Bay on Sun­day.


If Ezekiel El­liott’s le­gal team can­not put his sus­pen­sion on hold again, he will not be el­i­gi­ble to play again un­til Nov. 30 against the Red­skins.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.