Lawyer discusses what could happen if Mason Rudolph sues Myles Garrett for defamation

Of all the ridiculous things that were said by ESPN panelists over the past week regarding the Myles Garrett-Mason Rudolph situation, one of them genuinely made me laugh.

In the moments after Mike Tomlin’s interview on “First Take” where he defended Rudolph against Garrett’s reiterated charge of a racial slur, co-host Max Kellerman sarcastically referred to Mike Tomlin on numerous occasions as “Rudolph’s defense attorney.”

To which fellow host Stephen A. Smith responded, “As far as I’m concerned you’ve acted as a defense attorney for Myles Garrett.”

That was funny. And Smith was right.

On a couple levels.

Because whether Kellerman meant to do this or not during the course of the conversation, Kellerman kept slipping in the phrase, “I think Myles Garrett believes Mason Rudolph said something. He thought he heard something.”

Folks, “I believe I heard him call me a racial slur” is a helluva long way from “He called me an ‘n-word’ while I was tackling him to the ground.”

That’s what Garrett said on the ESPN “Outside the Lines” interview which originally aired Feb. 13.

Want a prediction? I bet you within the next few months Garrett starts using that exact phrase spun by Kellerman.

It’s a subtle walk back. It’s a nuanced retreat. It’s a continuing effort to scrub his own image, while still making the allegation against Rudolph. But it will soften the language for any potential defamation lawsuit.

Something Rudolph’s legal representation has implied it may pursue.

It shouldn’t matter to Rudolph and to those — myself included — who think Garrett is lying. The damage to Rudolph’s reputation is already done.

It won’t matter in Cleveland. It appears most people there will believe anything Garrett says. And it certainly won’t matter to the cause-chasers on social media who never let facts get in the way of a good ol’ virtue-signaling tweet.

So Garrett will have still accomplished his goal.

Although it may matter in a court, if Garrett changes his story before he is sworn under oath. Defamation cases are hard enough to prove as it is, especially if the defendant changes his tune mid-song to muddy the waters of the charge.

Maybe that would be Garrett’s convoluted attempt to halfway acquiesce and put the story to bed in hopes of neutering any inclination Rudolph may have to sue.

But don’t be stunned if Garrett goes down that road. After all, Josina Anderson might have been the one to give him directions onto this highway in the first place. Why shouldn’t another ESPN talking head take him off the exit ramp?

If it’s me, I sue. I couldn’t let it go. I’d be too ticked off. Then again, I wouldn’t be the one opening up my entire coaching staff, past and present teammates, pretty much any ex-girlfriend, any person I’ve had an argument with, and any former opponent with a grudge to testify for or against me in a legal process that could last months.

It’s a lot for Rudolph to consider.

On Monday, I was joined on ESPN Radio Pittsburgh by David Oberdick. He’s a lawyer in Pittsburgh with a background in defamation cases for Meyer, Unkovic, and Scott.

He made a similar reference to “the Kellerman defense” as a potential strategy in our interview.

We talked about a number of different angles to consider for Rudolph and his legal team as they may be contemplating taking action against Garrett.

It should be noted that the suit may be filed in California. That’s important. Because it may make Rudolph’s case easier to argue.

Get used to this phrase, “defamation per se.” That roughly means words or statements that injure a person’s reputation without the need to prove an injury has occurred. And California has a broad interpretation of that claim.

If the courts allow that interpretation to apply, Oberdick brought up one very interesting quandary for Garrett’s defense.

Essentially, Garrett may paint himself into a corner. Because if this case gets to a damage phase, Garrett may need to somehow argue that the alleged slur by Rudolph — the one that was so ugly and incendiary that it set him into a fit of rage — is also simultaneously not damaging enough to soil to Rudolph’s reputation if he uttered it.

Good luck with that.

In Wednesday’s podcast, we also get into how much the damages could be, what Rudolph would have to prove to win, how Garrett’s legal team would likely defend him, and how a trial’s mechanics would work.

Also, I ask Oberdick how in the world Rudolph goes about proving he didn’t say something.

Oberdick tells us more and explains all these legal layers in Wednesday’s podcast.

Listen: Tim Benz speaks with Pittsburgh lawyer David Oberdick about how Mason Rudolph could pursue legal action against Myles Garrett