STart with Nash...
...But, ultimately under the law, the decision as to -- and I think the cases are quite clear about this, the decisions are clear that the arbitrator has the discretion to make judgments about whether something is cumulative or not cumulative. and again here, though --
The Court: You know, it's interesting, because under the law arbitrators don't have the authority to make decisions that testimony is going to be cumulative unless they specify in what respect they would be cumulative. They cannot just conclude oh, well, we can't have him because his testimony is cumulative. That's my understanding of what the cases say.
Some case have been -- some arbitration awards have been, I believe, vacated precisely because an arbitrator mad a finding that testimony would be cumulative and didn't specify in what respects it would be cumulative. I ask you who else but Mr. Pash could have given testimony about whether or not his edit or what his edits were about or how extensive they really were or if he was trying to support Mr. Goodell or any other things that an edit could cover, who else could have possibly give that testimony except Mr. Pash?
Mr Nash: Your Honor, Mr. Wells was asked about this.
The Court: I know he gave his answer, you know, Harvard trained, you always have some comments. Frankly, I didn't find that answer very enlightening. I think he said it's a thick report, and a Harvard trained lawyer, as Mr. Pash is, would always have something to say, but I don't know what that means.
Mr. Nash: This goes back to our fundamental point about the CBA. There's nothing that prevents someone from the league office from being involved in the underlying investigation.
The Court: I didn't say he couldn't be involved, I'm talking about the cases which say that even though this is not Federal District Court and governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, there are some basic procedures of fairness that have to be followed, and one of them often is that you have to allow someone to make their case by calling witnesses, and I'm just trying to figure out what the big objection was in calling Mr. Pash. I submit to you that it's not sufficient to say or conclude without specifying that his testimony would have been cumulative.
Mr. Nash: And not relevant to the core facts. We..