The seven-time Cy Young awardee lost his appeal to reconsider his defamation suit against his former trainer Brian McNamee. The lawsuit stemmed from the statements of McNamee accusing Roger Clemens of using steroids and human growth hormones. The trainer told Senator Mitchell during the height of steroid investigation in baseball and a Sports Illustrated columnist that he personally injected Clemens with steroids and HGH several times.

The 3 panel judge of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 in favor of the lower court’s decision dismissing most of the claims of Clemens because of jurisdiction issue. The lower court under U.S. District Judge Keith Ellison upheld that they don’t have any jurisdiction on the claims of Clemens since the statements were made in New York. Clemens camp immediately appealed the ruling but they were not successful in their effort to pin down McNamee for his testimony. Clemens’ lawyers argued that the lower court made a wrong decision for ruling that McNamee is entitled to immunity when he testified in the Mitchell investigation. They also contend that McNamee could be tried in Texas because he visited the slugger several times.

Rusty Hardin who represents Clemens told the AP that they will still study the ruling of the appeals court. “We haven’t read it yet, but I can tell you what we would say. We understand that the vote was 2-1 and we’re going to look at it and see if we’re going to pursue it and make up our mind after we get a chance to read and digest it,” Hardin said.

The AP and NY Daily News quoted portions of the court’s decision. “The statements in this case concerned non-Texas activities - the delivery of performance-enhancing drugs to Clemens in New York and Canada. The statements did not concern activity in Texas; nor were they made in Texas or directed to Texas residents any more than residents of any state. As such, the district court did not err in dismissing Clemens’ suit for lack of personal jurisdiction over McNamee,” the court said.

The 2 judges who affirmed the lower court ruling were Judges Jerry Edwin Smith and W. Eugene Davis. Judge Catharina Haynes however, issued an 11 page dissenting opinion. She believed that Texas jurisdiction did exist in the case because of the training relationship between the two. This is evidenced by repeated visits of McNamee to Texas.

“McNamee’s numerous visits to Texas were business contacts with Clemens in the course of the very training relationship that did — or did not — give rise to the steroid use,” said Judge Haynes. “Clemens has an equal, if not greater, interest in securing relief in his home state, where the brunt of the injury to his personal and professional reputation was sustained,” she added.

Roger Clemens is still facing perjury charges for allegedly lying to federal investigators about his steroid use. The result of the ruling may or may not affect his case but it will also bolster the claims of McNamee that he really used performance enhancing drugs when he was still under the trainer. McNamee’s camp was happy with the decision. Richard Emery, representing McNamee, told the AP that the appeals court protected his client from legal bullying.

The legal team of Clemens will again face another battle in New York to defend Clemens against the counter suit filed by Brian McNamee.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS