Judge Rules Former NFL Players Waited Too Long To File Claims Over Alleged Painkiller Regimens, Dismisses Lawsuit

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

NFL Painkillers Class Action Lawsuit Overview: 

• Who: A judge has dismissed claims against the National Football League made by a class of retired players. 
• Why: The judge determined players had waited too long to file claims that the league was responsible for injuries they suffered due to its alleged practice of prescribing them painkillers and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

A federal judge in California cited a statute of limitations while dismissing the claims of retired National Football League (NFL) players that the league improperly gave them painkillers during their playing days. 

The retired players claimed in a 2014 class action lawsuit that they suffered a number of injuries due to the leagues practice of prescribing them painkillers and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, including addiction, organ damage and musculoskeletal injuries. 

Players, led by Super Bowl champions and former Chicago Bears Richard Dent and Jim McMahon, argued the league disregarded players’ individual medical histories or any potential for negative interactions.

The judge determined, however, that the players, the last of whom retired in 2008, should have known well before filing their complaint that they had been allegedly over-prescribed drugs by NFL team doctors. 

The statute of limitations for their claims was only two to six years, according to the judge.

“If such an investigation would have disclosed a factual basis for a cause of action, the statute of limitations begins to run on that cause of action when the investigation would have brought such information to light,” the judge’s order states.

Judge Rejects Players’ Argument That They Only Recently Discovered NFL Allegedly At Fault

The judge also rejected the players’ argument that they only discovered the NFL was allegedly at fault for the injuries after they talked to a lawyer in the year before they lodged the class action lawsuit.

“At the moment they suffered each musculoskeletal injury they now allege against the NFL, they were obligated to conduct a reasonable investigation of the NFL’s direct or indirect responsibility,” the judge wrote. 

Further, the judge questioned why the players had decided to wait for as long as they did to talk to a lawyer about the alleged injuries they incurred. 

The judge similarly ruled that claims of suffering from addiction or organ failure occurred too long before they filed their class action lawsuit. 

The NFL had previously argued the court could not legally interpret each team’s individual collective bargaining agreement while asking for the complaint to be dismissed. 

Do you agree with the judge that the player’s waited too long to make their claims against the NFL? Let us know in the comments! 

The plaintiffs are represented by William N. Sinclair, Steven D. Silverman, Andrew G. Slutkin, Christopher Macchiaroli and Phillip J. Closius of Silverman Thompson; Mel T. Owens of Namanny Byrne & Owens PC; and Stuart A. Davidson and Mark J. Dearman of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP.

The NFL Painkillers Class Action Lawsuit is Dent, et al. v. National Football League, Case No. 3:14-cv-02324, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Vail Resorts Employees Sue for Unpaid Wages in Class Action
• City of Chicago Employees Sue Over Vaccine Mandate, an ‘Involuntary Game of Monty Hall’
• NFL’s Latest Request To Halt Painkiller Class Action Should be Denied, Argue Former Players
• Minor League Baseball Players Cite Tweet by Mets Owner Steve Cohen in MLB Compensation Class Action