Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

+4
k_j_88
dbrown4
gyso
Sam
8 posters

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by Sam Fri Jul 25, 2014 11:18 pm

ESPN says Doc is likely to quit if Sterling is not removes.  As much as I detest ESPN, this seems logical.


Sam

[size=32]CEO: If Sterling stays, Doc likely goes
Updated: July 23, 2014, 5:43 PM ET
By Ramona Shelburne | ESPN[/size]

LOS ANGELES -- The interim CEO of the Los Angeles Clippers testified in state court Tuesday afternoon that coach and team president Doc Rivers has told him on multiple occasions that he doesn't think he wants to CONTINUEDoc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Arrow-10x10 as coach if Donald Sterling remains owner of the team.

Dick Parsons said he has talked to Rivers, several players and key sponsors who are troubled by Sterling's continued ownership of the franchise, which is being adjudicated in a California probate court.

At issue is whether Shelly Sterling acted properly in selling the franchise, without her husband's expressed consent, for a record $2 billion to former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. Parsons was called as a witness in the trial Tuesday to discuss the effect the continuing uncertainty over the ownership situation has had on the Clippers franchise.

"If Doc were to leave, that would be a disaster," Parsons said. "Doc is the father figure of the team. Chris [Paul] is the on-court captain of the team. But Doc is really the guy who leads the effort. He's the coach, the grown-up, he's a man of character and ability -- not just in a basketball sense, but in the ability to connect with people and gain their trust. The team believes in him and admires and loves him. If he were to bail, with all the other circumstances, it would accelerate the death spiral."

More from ESPN.com
Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Markazi_arash_mIn court on Tuesday, interim Clippers CEO Dick Parsons outlined a "death spiral" scenario for the team if Donald Sterling retains ownership, Arash Markazi writes. Story


Donald Sterling's lawyers objected to Parsons' testimony on Rivers, arguing that only Rivers should be allowed to speak on his state of mind in this matter, and if that were the case, Rivers should be called as a witness. While Judge Michael Levanas agreed with the notion, he allowed Parsons to express his opinion on the matter and noted he would not consider it as fact.

"I don't understand why they didn't call Doc Rivers and the players they want to call to give that testimony," Sterling's lawyer Bobby Samini said. "I understand Mr. Parsons had an opinion about what might happen, but they could've easily brought those individuals in to give that testimony themselves."
Samini also cast doubt on some of Parsons' more dire predictions about the Clippers' financial stability should Sterling remain owner.

"I understand -- I'm just not seeing the sinkhole out here swallowing us all up," he said. "But that was the testimony Mr. Parsons gave."

Parsons said that although ticket revenue was essentially the same as the past season's, many of the team's 20 or so sponsors have made it clear they want to continue a relationship with the team only if Sterling is replaced as owner. He cited MANDALAY BAYDoc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Arrow-10x10 and Kia Motors as examples of sponsors who are "sitting at the edge of the pool and don't want to go in the water unless there is resolution" on the ownership situation.

Parsons said during cross-examination that only six or seven sponsors had explicitly asked to be disassociated from the Clippers following the scandal that enveloped the team after Sterling's racially insensitive comments were published April 25 by TMZ.com. The team gave the remaining two-thirds "a holiday" before they felt compelled to disassociate from the franchise.

LESTER MUNSON ANALYSIS
Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Munson_lester_mThe latest Sterling lawsuit is laughable both in form and in substance. It is badly drafted and fails to state anything remotely resembling a valid legal claim. The lawyers obviously threw it together in a hurry.

The various "causes of action" are the theories you use when you have no real solid theory for your lawsuit. The 11th cause of action may have some minimal importance.

If these lawyers can find a judge who will somehow conclude that there is a chance that Donald Sterling is entitled to an injunction (a highly unlikely scenario), then they could use the judge to intervene in the probate trial. It is a possibility, but a remote possibility. Most judges in Los Angeles would defer to the probate trial.

There is no question that Donald Sterling remains in desperation mode. 
-- Lester Muinson


"If none of your sponsors want to sponsor you, your coach doesn't want to coach you and players don't want to play for you, what do you have?" Parsons said.

Parsons and Bank of America expert Anwar Zakkour testified that the $2 billion price Ballmer agreed to pay for the franchise was much higher than the team's revenues justified under the most aggressive and optimistic predictions.
"Whether you want to call it a slam dunk or a home run, none of us believed we would get to the $2 billion," said Zakkour, who helped conduct the hurried sale. "None of us even believed we'd get to the $1.8 billion number, so that says it now."

Zakkour warned that if the sale fell through and the NBA restarted termination proceedings, there was significant risk the franchise would sell for far less.

"There are two things in my profession that are bad when you SELL A FRANCHISEDoc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Arrow-10x10: uncertainty and transparency," Zakkour said. "I think there's been a lot of press speculation that he paid a very full price for the Clippers. The highest price ever achieved for a sports team, when you focus on just the sports team."

Zakkour mentioned that the Los Angeles Dodgerssold for $2.15 billion, but that deal included $300 million to $400 million in real estate.

Dean Bonham, a sports marketing expert called by Sterling's lawyers, testified the sale price could increase if bidding were re-opened.

STERLING BANNED FOR LIFE


Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Nba_silver_sterling_203x114

NBA commissioner Adam Silver banned Clippers owner Donald Sterling from the league for life in the wake of Sterling's racist comments. Full coverage »

After court adjourned Tuesday, Donald Sterling filed another lawsuit in Superior Court against the NBA, commissioner Adam Silver and Shelly Sterling.

"The NBA can have their vote any time they want if they think they can remove him as the owner," Samini said. "Donald Sterling came and said many times, 'I want the NBA to do it.' I think that's what he's waiting for. He's going to see if they're going to actually go through with that."

The probate court trial will resume Wednesday afternoon. Closing arguments are scheduled for Monday. None of the attorneys would comment on what transpired during a meeting with Ballmer and Donald Sterling on Monday afternoon, except to confirm that the meeting took place.

Asked about a possible settlement, Samini said, "Anything could happen, but I don't see it in the tea leaves right now."
Sam
Sam
Admin

Posts : 22663
Join date : 2009-10-10

https://samcelt.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by gyso Fri Jul 25, 2014 11:31 pm

Sam,

I posted a stupid joke on the earlier thread.  I see that you may have had trouble with the formatting of the previous thread, so I will repeat my stupid joke here so you can delete the other thread if you want to.

Okay, here goes (with a minor edit):

The Sterling legal team is so cheap.

How cheap, you say?

They are so cheap, they didn't subpoena Doc Rivers because they didn't want to pay him mileage from Orlando to LA.


gyso

_________________
Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Logo_f11
gyso
gyso

Posts : 21891
Join date : 2009-10-13

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by dbrown4 Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:28 pm

I'm afraid you can have all the court hijinks you want with this case, but you can't force someone to sell their team just because you don't like what he said in an assumed private conversation. Anymore than you can force a team owner to change the name of the Redskins just because the name offends you.

Like it or not or disagree strongly with what he said in private, DS is going to win this case hands down and will not have to sell his team. What Adam Sterling needs to do is drag out these proceedings long enough and hope the old racist geyser bites the dusts. That will remove the $1 Billion price tag the NBA is going to have to fork up when this is all said and done. DS is under a tremendous amount of pressure similar to what a Ken Lay at Enron was under and he died of a heart attack, removing him from the equation.

These two owners need to put an end to this craziness. All they have to do is stick it out to the end and have enough money to pay the lawyers to get there. Snyder's ok there and in good health, DS is past 80 years old so he is at considerable risk of not seeing the end of this to his favor.

Do I like the things DS said in private? Of course not. Does anybody?! No one needs to honestly think or act like that anymore in this day and age. Racism really is stupid and needs to be eradicated. But you can't build your case on a private conversation unbeknownst to the person in question and take that public and use it against him. Not in this country. It just isn't going to happen. Nobody likes what he said. There is no question about that. But this is the wrong battle to choose. The NBA just isn't going to win it.

The issue here isn't about racism and racist statements and the completely irrational implication and conclusion that an owner must sell his assets as a result of those statements made in private. It's about freedom of speech as set up in the Constitution. The NBA can package it anyway they want, but a Supreme Court is going to see it differently if it goes that far. Even in California. It's clearly not a political issue. It's all legal. All the emotion is removed in that situation. Trust me, I know from experience. It's the difference between 2 people in court representing themselves vs. having attorneys represent you. Your attorney removes all the emotion from the scene.

Now, as for Doc, bless his heart, he is under contract. He can say he wants to quit but actually quitting is going to be a problem. Same with Chris Paul. He's under contract. They will be sued mercilessly if they don't show up for work and will lose in court as well. It's a simple issue of contract law and union law. Are these guys really under duress because their boss is a racist? Did they not know this when they took the job? Did they find this out after they signed the contract?

The end needs to come to this run of frivolous lawsuits that are completely outrageous in their scope. You can't force someone to sell their assets just because you don't like them or like what they said no matter how offensive. Not in America.

db




dbrown4
dbrown4

Posts : 5263
Join date : 2009-10-29
Age : 60

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by Sam Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:41 pm

gyso,

It's not at all stupid.  The fact is the odds are about 50/50 that it's no joke at all.

It stays in both spots as far as I'm concerned.

Sam
Sam
Sam
Admin

Posts : 22663
Join date : 2009-10-10

https://samcelt.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by Sam Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:34 pm

Db,

I don't pretend to know a whole lot of details about this case, but I did have a year of business law.  On several occasions, I've served as an expert witness on business law court cases.  And I had four years of military law.  None of those experiences makes me very knowledgeable on the law because I've probably forgotten the vast majority of anything I learned.

But one fact struck me in all three scenarios and has remained my most vivid memory of the experiences/  The law is very much about interpretation.  For example, suppose all owners have to sign some boilerplate form to the effect that they promise not to engage in any activities that are detrimental to the league.  Considerable time could conceivably be spent on the issue of what the terms "engage in any activities" and/or "detrimental to the league" mean.

And one of several ways of addressing the issue would be to conduct a survey of the general public to elicit the public's interpretation.  After all, the general public (presumably narrowed down to NBA fans or even possibly just Clippers fans) is a major element in shaping the reputation of the NBA.

Such surveys were the basis for my role in the cases—one involving a possible change of venue for an underworld character, one involving alleged false advertising, one pertaining to the issue of secondary meaning, and the fourth involving trademark infringement in the automotive industry.  I testified in three of the cases.

As a matter of interest (on a slow NBA day), the game that's played in a lot of court cases is that, in order to convince the judge to introduce research into evidence, the research firm must (1)  adhere strictly to something like two dozen standards of research and must go overboard in ensuring there is no source of bias that is not controlled by the research and (2) be ready for the opposing lawyer to hire competing research firms to tear the research apart.

In one case (Mass. Blue Cross Blue Shield was the plaintiff and my client, I was on the stand for two days as the opponent's attorney grilled me on detail after detail—even challenging me on the accuracy of the interviewers in recording responses.  Fortunately, I lucked out, and the judge admitted the research into evidence.  The actual testimony about the research was very brief and anticlimactic because getting it admitted is the major roadblock.  And my client won the case.

Suppose you were a judge and the matter of damage to the NBA caused by Sterling's comments was in question.  Which way do you think the public would "vote?"  As a researcher, I could have no opinion, so I'll leave the conclusion to you.

For every survey that is conducted to serve as evidence, there are multiple other approaches, and each of those approaches could potentially turn the verdict in one direction or another.  In the Sterling case, I expect there will be steps taken by both sides to prove that his privacy was or was not violated respectively.

I mention all of this to suggest that it could be premature to assume one outcome or another.

By the way, my favorite case was one in which my survey never got to court because it didn't come out the way my client desired.  So he buried it.

It was a change of venue case, and it involved a guy named Gennaro (or Gerry) Angulo, who became the top hood in New England within five or years of his trial.  But, when we conducted the survey, his career or murder, drugs, prostitution, and any other illegal act you can name was in its relative infancy.

Nonetheless, his attorney hoped to prove that the public had made up its mind about his client, the defendant, so we conducted a survey.  There were really only two questions were structurally simple, but their content was a bit offbeat.

Question 1: "1'm going to mention several names.  For each name, please tell me whether you are very familiar, somewhat familiar, somewhat unfamiliar, or very unfamiliar with that name.  Here are the names:

Joseph DiMaggio
Francis Sinatra
Lawrence Berra
Gennaro Angulo
And another half dozen Italian-American names that I can't recall

(By the way, the names were asked in constantly rotating order to avoid any possibility of "order bias.")

Question 2. (Asked only of those people who were at least "somewhat familiar" with the name): Would you say your opinion of (REPEAT NAME) is very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable, or very unfavorable?"

Question 2 was asked about Gennaro Angulo in only 3% of the cases, because only 3% of the hundreds of random respondents were even "a little familiar" with the name.  That's why the study got buried.  At least we got paid.  From the lawyer's checking account.

Sam
Sam
Sam
Admin

Posts : 22663
Join date : 2009-10-10

https://samcelt.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by k_j_88 Sat Jul 26, 2014 8:09 pm

DBrown,

An intelligent post.

I think you make a very good point about the contractual obligations of both Doc Rivers and Chris Paul. Sure, they would lose those battles, but even in losing those battles, I would have to say their motivations at the very least are just.

When it comes to what Sterling said in private, I can understand the hesitancy to just abrogate his ownership of the Clippers because it creates an open-ended question. What else can an owner say to be banned/forced to sell his team? Mark Cuban was one of the ones to bring up this very fact in the public spotlight.

However, there is another side to this. Aside from his Constitutional rights to free speech, we cannot discount the fact that the NBA is a private entity. Essentially, that means they have great lateral to include/exclude any people they wish for any reasons they deem appropriate. Being an owner in the NBA is not a right, but a privilege.

Also, this was largely a PR move on the NBA's part. How would the general public perceive the NBA for turning a blind eye and/or condoning Sterling's comments? They'd take a lot of heat from the fans and the media, plus the players could potentially boycott. That would be quite damaging to the NBA's reputation, especially if the stars join in on the boycotting. That would lead to a loss of sponsorships, fans, and ultimately revenue. As they say money talks and the best place to hurt a business is in their wallet.

I for one believe that the NBA's hands were tied the minute the conversation went public. Adam Silver had no choice but to act swiftly and severely. As I said before, the NBA's powers are rather extensive. What potency would the league have if rogue members could simply do as they please? They have control to maintain.

Anyway, I'm sure this will play out with Sterling losing ownership.



KJ
k_j_88
k_j_88

Posts : 4747
Join date : 2013-01-06
Age : 35

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by dbrown4 Sat Jul 26, 2014 8:36 pm

Sam,

I think you are a lot like Danny Ainge. I never know how you are going to respond to a particular entry, but I love the script that follows. I've never been disappointed. I know I have been at best flaky with my attention/contributions to this site over the years, but you are the one constant that has been weaved throughout its relatively short history.

I know every year the board attempts to have a gathering at a Celtics game during the season. Due to my divorce and lack of ability to rub two nickels together during that time, I have not been able to attend these grand events. But the desire is there.

One of my bucket list items is to meet you in person. I hope that our lives through God's control don't take a turn that will not allow that to happen. I would actually like to combine it with you meeting my three boys as they would benefit from that encounter very much. I think you are one of the most fascinating person I have not met, so much so I want my boys to remember meeting you 60 years from now.

To give you a little history on my diatribe on DS, I have tried three times to post it and the first two times for some reason my computer decided to do a reset and deleted my works in progress. I wanted to keep it apolitical so not to raise any concern for the site. So maybe the "deletions" were meant to happen.

I respect and will always respect what you have done for a living no matter what areas you have focused in. On the said DS case, public opinion is very well noted and stated. Almost 100%. If the judge were to look at those results the decision is a no-brainer. Unfortunately in my opinion, the judge is the one making the decision and he or she should be completely unbiased in any way but what the judge sees as the fairest decision on the case based on the law and some interpretation should be he/her ruling and not influenced by outside opinion. It's the old battle between ruling the bench vs. ruling from the law argument. There is some middle ground there I am sure.

From my previous career, public opinion and behavior is absolutely useless and is in no way a barometer. In financial services and decisions that pertain to managing one's money, the public is wrong almost 90% of the time. They are horrific at it. TJ will attest from his vast experience with third party administrators with retirement plans. That's why there are so many poor people in this country.

I have come to appreciate the benefit of paying for and having legal representation. I was actually prepared to defend myself in my child support case simply because I could not afford it at the time. Up until the night before the original trial back in November last year, I had my case ready and was ready to go up against my ex-wife high powered attorneys. The night before, I get an email from opposing counsel saying trial would not be reached the following day. That was a blessing in disguise

Since then, I have gotten married and have representation. The trial hasn't been heard to date through another continuance and now the other side wants to settle. I'll let you know how it works out!

I agree my decision on the case is premature and more than likely uninformed, so like a lot of my responses on this site it is just a gut feeling. But that puts me on record. I won't be changing that. If I'm wrong, as always, I will admit so and ask for forgiveness. The best decision for DS to make for himself is to take the money and run. Time is not on his side. $2 billion is a ton of money for a team that is worth nowhere close to that. In the end, I still has $2 Bilion. I think that is why Steve B. made that kind of offer and besides, it's only 10% of his net worth and he was looking for a good investment. If I could outbid everybody and only forfeit 10% of my net worth for an NBA team, I'd be on it as well.

I think for the rest of all of us believers in free speech, at least staying the course and protecting that right straight up even given the egregious public circumstances for this case, his should fight this literally to the death. Again, this is my humble opinion.

To repeat, if the judge were taking a look at public opinion, it would be overwhelmingly in favor of the NBA. But there is always the issue of the law. And that is the delicate balance between law and interpretation that permeates every case where a judge rules.

That was a rather long wondering diatribe to begin answering your questions! Just to enter the game, he's my input.

Joe DiMaggio - You can tell by my age that JD was before my era of knowledge but I know what he did through his life and would say I am somewhat familiar and my opinion is very favorable of him.

Frank Sinatra - again outside my wheel house but since I grew up in a musical family very familiar with him and an opinion that is somewhat favorable for him given his "mob" ties.

Yogi Berra - Since I somewhat like baseball and combined with the fact that he was portrayed as a comedian after his career, I feel I am somewhat familiar with him and have a very favorable opinion of him. He makes me laugh.

As predicted, Gennaro Angulo is very unfamiliar and I would therefore have no opinion of him, even given your brief description of his life. It didn't ring a bell.

To follow up, I think the issue of damage to the NBA could go either way on this. Either way being from little of no damage to a complete decimation of the league. There is clearly no benefit to the league on this.

I'll always throw my opinion out there, right or wrong. I am blessed to be on this site and live in a country where I can do that and either be supported or be criticized for that view but do so knowing I can still wake up in the morning and not be executed or forced to sell my assets as a result of that opinion.

You fought for that right and I am forever grateful for you and all those who fought for that right and all the others and all the respect and honor that goes behind that so people like me can live that life of freedom that comes with that thanks to your sacrifice.

db



dbrown4
dbrown4

Posts : 5263
Join date : 2009-10-29
Age : 60

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by Sam Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:19 am

db,

Thanks for the nice words.  I would like nothing better to get together with you and your three boys.  In what general area do you live?

First things first.  If you are remarried, I have very good news for you.  The second time around is not just better.  It's like being in a different world.  I was married for 20 years when my wife said I was a great guy but she didn't like being married and wanted to go to Peru and live with the mountain people.  So she did, leaving me as a single parent of three kids, ages 5, 6 and 10.  And it was also a multi-racial situation, which is neither here nor there but it was looked at differently in the early 70s than nowadays, and even walking through a shopping mall often invited some kind of invective.  And it was no bed of roses to have the boy be the only black in his first grade class.  Even the teacher was freaked out. Moreover, I had just started the research company I've now been operating for 45 years, and I was going to school full time (during the day) to seek a couple of graduate degrees in Sociology.

Actually, because my mental age was not much older than that of the kids, that period immediately became one of the most enduringly enjoyable of my life.  In fact, my two daughters are visiting today, and we're extremely close even though we live many hundreds of miles apart.  The boy eventually earned both Bachelor's and Master's Degrees, and he is now dividing his time between his native Nassau and Florida as an ambassador of the Bahamas Tourism Council.

Anyway, my second (and final) wife entered my life after several years of the single parent life, and we've now been married 35 extremely happy years.  So you've got a whole lot to look forward to.  The instincts born of experience are marvelous guideposts.

As for the Sterling case, I just want to make certain you didn't think my point was that the case should come down to the judge's opinion versus the public's opinion.  My only reason for involving the public was in the event that Sterling had agreed not to do anything that injured the reputation of the NBA.  Involving the public would simply provide evidence as to whether the reputation of the NBA among the general public had suffered because of Sterling's comments.  Research could also be conducted among other club owners or the NBA Board of Governors or NBA coaches or NBA player alumni or college athletic directors or any constituency that could reasonably be considered to be an important element in shaping the reputation of the NBA.

The evidence would be presented to the judge and, as you said, the judge obviously would make the final decision....BUT perhaps influenced at least partly by how much the evidence revealed that Sterling's actions had besmirched the NBA's reputation among people to whom that reputation mattered.  That's very different from conjecturing, for example, how much the weight of public opinion would pressure the judge.

Whatever the result of the trial, should we start a pool on how soon the first related new book will be published?

Anyway, I envy you your future with your new partner in life.  Enjoy it to the hilt; please give your present wife my best wishes; and I hope we'll meet soon.

Sam
Sam
Sam
Admin

Posts : 22663
Join date : 2009-10-10

https://samcelt.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by dbrown4 Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:58 am

Yeah, the books a given. Whoever loses is going to need some side money to refill the coffers.

Sam,

Understood on your point. Judges have a wide range of things they must consider before making any judgment. Law and public opinion are just two. I don't even know if DS thinks/believes he did anything to injure the reputation of the NBA. That clause sounds very subjective, hence emotions come into play and once you jump into the legal arena, all emotions are off the table. But one could argue by taking surveys, that provides concrete evidence of the extent of the injury.

Your family sounds awesome! When Robin and I married back in June, I inherited her 3 girls, 21, 16 and 11 as step father. My boys are 11, 9, and 8 even though I am 5 years older than Robin. So we get a lot of the Brady Bunch ribbing. They all get along very well when they are together. Unfortunately my ex has them down in Texas for the time being. It would be great to have them back up here.

Robin and I reside in Raleigh, NC with her girls. I actually was born here, grew up here except for a couple of years in DC after college.

db
dbrown4
dbrown4

Posts : 5263
Join date : 2009-10-29
Age : 60

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by gyso Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:14 am

dbrown,

I thought I remembered that you are from somewhere in NC.  I'll be moving down to Charlotte at the end of August.  My local office is in Cary, but I will still be working with the folks up in Millinocket, ME.  I tele-commute from a home office, but I still need to go into the Cary office once in a while.

I agree with Sam, things went much better the second time, sometimes due to the lessons learned from the first time.  My current (and last) wife was my second, and she had four girls, ages 16, 18, 21 and 25 when we met just over 10 years ago.  I had none to add to the bunch.  None of them call me Dad, but by the many definitions of Dad, I am that.  Especially to the youngest, because she lived with us longer and will be reunited with us after we move.  I am Grampy to two of their children, with three more on the way this fall.

The three oldest girls are all pregnant, with due dates in September, October and December.  Two out of these three live in Charlotte, Mrs. gyso cannot get there soon enough!!  As a matter of fact, she is down there now.

This could possibly be the seeds of our forum's first NC get-together!  We'll get Sam down here somehow (LOL).  I really hope the Hornets home game with the Celtics falls on a Saturday, I'll certainly will be looking for that when they publish the season schedule.

I again agree with Sam, enjoy your future with your new partner in life!!  These past 10 years went by in a flash for us, so take care to cherish each moment.

gyso

_________________
Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Logo_f11
gyso
gyso

Posts : 21891
Join date : 2009-10-13

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by dbrown4 Sun Jul 27, 2014 11:20 am

gyso,

I do like that idea. I have actually taken my boys to two Charlotte games vs. Celtics. One went to overtime and the Celtics lost. The other was a blowout by Boston. I know I had passed the torch to my oldest son when he was in tears when Boston lost the first game.

That's a lot easier sell going to Charlotte although I will definitely get to Boston one day soon. You will be very busy over the next 6-12 months! Congratulations!!

Thank you for the encouraging words. Robin is an amazing catch. I'm very fortunate,

db
dbrown4
dbrown4

Posts : 5263
Join date : 2009-10-29
Age : 60

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by dbrown4 Sun Jul 27, 2014 11:40 am

kj,

I agree AS did the right thing initially. He had no choice but to at least ban him from all future games. But the subsequent actions/reactions I thought are a bit harsh and unconstitutional in my opinion.

Here in NC, since it is a right to work state, the employer also has the right to can your ass at anytime for any reason they deem appropriate. You, of course can quit anytime for any reason. There are non-competes and non-solicitation agreements but each company to choose to implement those as is their right and choice.

Also, the NBA is unionized. I'm not a specialist in that neighborhood (although one of my favorite college courses I took in summer school at UNC-CH - History of US Labor and it focused mainly on Labor Unions) but they operate under a whole different set of laws that us non-union states or entities work under. They unionize for a number of reasons one of which is to restrict the talent pool which, surprise, surprise, raises the labor rate. Since there are only 400 plus members of the NBA union, you can see why the salaries are what they are.

The case is good water cooler fodder. Racism, split marriage, Alzheimer's Disease, attorneys...sounds like a good movie plot!!

db
dbrown4
dbrown4

Posts : 5263
Join date : 2009-10-29
Age : 60

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by dboss Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:39 pm

DS can and probably will litigate his property rights until the day he dies.

There is no happy ending in sight.  As far as contractual obligations, it can be argued that the working conditions under the Clipper's ownership is intolerable because the owner is in fact a racist.

Doc Rivers and Chris Paul as well as other players could refuse to work for the Clippers because the owner is a racist.  So while DS can probably retain ownership of his franchise, his employees may be set free at last.

Worse, the entire team could go on strike and refuse to play.  Support from other NBA players could result in a complete work stoppage across the league.  DS would like nothing better than to see everyone get screwed.  

As the 2014 season gets closer I expect to see both coaches and players for the Clippers seek to have their contracts voided so that they can become free agents.  Then DS will sue these players and coaches for breach of contract and that will be litigated.  However the commissioner could immediately rule in their favor and allow both players and coaches to seek employment with other teams.

I do believe that the league has a right to rule on the validity of contracts.

dboss
dboss
dboss

Posts : 18636
Join date : 2009-11-01

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by beat Sun Jul 27, 2014 3:11 pm

DB

I agree with most everything you have stated.

Isn't there some merit to the presumption of privacy in one's own home?

Wonder how much "digging" the lawyers/private investigators for DS are doing?

If there is dirt on any other owner........... well this could be very interesting.
Could be headline stuff for the National Inquirer.

The trail down this road appears very foggy right now with no end in sight.

beat



beat
beat

Posts : 7032
Join date : 2009-10-13
Age : 70

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by NYCelt Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:41 pm

dbrown,

I agree with your thoughts.  From the start, this whole story has bothered me.  I find myself defending Sterling despite the fact I think he's a disgusting human being.  The only thing that appears to give the NBA a leg to stand on is the language on best interests of the league in the ownership agreement.  Even that seems to open itself up to arbitrary exercise and interpretation.

As for Doc and Chris Paul I'd love to tell them both to go take a hike.  Both knew the kind of person Sterling was and they were willing to sign a contract and accept his money.  Once one of Sterling's many little eruptions caught widespread attention they start shouting their sanctimonious song that they won't coach or play while he's owner.  Personally, I hope if either decide to stay out, their contracts can be terminated.  Taking the money from someone long known to have questionable views at best, then hitting the heights of hypocritical behavior only because he's widely called out, makes Rivers and Paul next behind the Donald Sterlings of the world in the buffoon line in my book.  My bet is they'll both show up for work, even after their public outcry.

On a more pleasant note, count me in with you and others in the 'better the second time around' marriage club.  It sounds like you've found a wonderful life partner this time.

Regards
NYCelt
NYCelt

Posts : 10602
Join date : 2009-10-12

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by Sam Sun Jul 27, 2014 7:02 pm

db,

The reason the clause sounded subjective was that it was fabricated by me, not excerpted from any specific contract of which I'm aware.  I deliberately made it subjective to illustrate how the matter of interpretation can be a major factor in a court case and (2) as you stated, there are many elements that could factor into an interpretation—even by a judge.

People certainly have the right to make private judgments relatively early in a court base based on what seems to them to be right and wrong.  My point is that this is not necessarily how the law works.  It's more a case of what a mixture of the law, the evidence, and the human factor produce as a decision.  Any of these three ingredients may be weighted more than the other two depending on the specific nature of the case.

I'll just mention a name.  O.J. Simpson.  I rest my case.

In most years, my wife and I (with our two kids, the cats) drive to St. Pete Beach and St. Augustine in Florida for vacation.  We take the westerly route (I-91, I-77, etc.  There's no good reason why we couldn't make a small detour to Raleigh or no detour at all to Charlotte.  So maybe a get-together would be a good possibility.

This year, we're hoping to go to Nassau if a timeshare trade comes through.  If not, we'll certainly go to Florida; and, even if we do go to Nassau, we might very well go to Florida (if the house we now have on the market sells).  So let's keep it in mind.  Perhaps we might persuade Bog Heckler to join us, since he seems to have his bags packed at all times.  And maybe some others.  Dboss is in Georgia,  Several members are in Florida.

Let's see how things play out.

Sam
Sam
Sam
Admin

Posts : 22663
Join date : 2009-10-10

https://samcelt.forumotion.net

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by dboss Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:25 pm

Now that sounds like fun.

Dboss
dboss
dboss

Posts : 18636
Join date : 2009-11-01

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by dbrown4 Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:49 pm

Sounds great, Sam. We're very flexible.

NYCelt, Another thing to consider is the current generation imposing its morals and views on an older generation. 60 years ago when DS was in his prime, his generation was using the "n" word and everything else in the book as commonly as the word "the". It was just the way it was back then. Obviously, we as US citizens hope we make notable progress from one generation to the next and the eradication of racism is a great move. There is absolutely nothing to the thought that one man or woman is inferior/superior to another man or woman because of the color of his skin, but people used to think that way at one time. But you will probably never get DS to ask for forgiveness and repent.

That may be the way to resolve the issue. Forgiveness and repentance. DS could probably whip up a very good apology done in private to the whole organization. He's had a lot of time to think about it. He can start from the beginning and how he came to the way he was. That was just the way he was raised. He loves his team. Otherwise he wouldn't be fighting so hard for it. People are very forgiving. I would expect the Clippers organization to be no different. Our generation thinks like our generation on racism.

A short story here. I attended Davidson College (way before Stephen Curry) outside of Charlotte from 1982-1986. My grandfather was a very distinguished professor and Dean of Faculty there from the late 1920's until his death in 1957. I never met him. Missed it by 6 years. But his reputation, legacy and legend lived on for many years. One of his students, Charles Ratliff, became his protégé and he too came back and taught Economics at Davidson for many years. He was there when I was there. He loved my grandfather because he inspired him to be a great professor. He would always have tons of stories about my grandfather to tell if you ever took one of his courses or stopped by his office. I was stopped numerous times in the hallways between classes by people I didn't know who would say, "Are you C.K. Brown's grandson?" "Yes" "Well, Dr. Ratliff was saying...." You get the picture.

One of Dr. Ratliff's students decided to do a report on my grandfather, inspired by Dr. Ratliff's many stories and quips from my grandfather. The student was so thorough, he found some personal writings my grandfather wrote where the "n" word was mentioned several if not numerous times. In his report, he concluded my grandfather was a racist. Dr. Ratliff, after reading his report said, you can't make that conclusion. You are crossing generations. You didn't live at that time and therefore can't make a conclusion like that. My grandfather was Dr. Ratliff's hero. He had a ton of respect for him despite any flaws he may have had. He was not going to let anyone tarnish his image. especially since he couldn't defend himself. But he did it in such a way that the student got it and rewrote his paper.

Now DS has lived from the 1930's to the present and has seen much change in racism and the views toward that. But it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks. It's not to say he can't change, but the odds are not in his favor. You can't judge DS anymore than I or that student can judge my grandfather. I never met him. I never lived with him or spent time with him.

But again, this all gets back to a private conversation that was baited and recorded. There are so many twists and turns to this case, that may get looked over.

Beat, I'm pretty sure the other owners have been advised by their lawyers to enjoy a glass of "shut the hell up" and lay low lest they may meet the same fate DS has. You have to admire Mark Cuban for getting out ahead of the curve, though. It's a very interesting case, nonetheless.

db

db
dbrown4
dbrown4

Posts : 5263
Join date : 2009-10-29
Age : 60

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by k_j_88 Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:45 pm

Eventually, Sterling's ownership of the Clippers would amount to a moot point. What good would it do for both the team and the league to lose sponsorships and fans?

I understand what you guys are saying about privacy, but consider this: Sterling is not at any risk of going to jail. Also, as a team owner, he is bound by the rules of the NBA. At any other kind of place of business, an employee couldn't say absolutely anything they wanted without any consequence. Why would/should the NBA be any different?

The NBA is entitled to maintaining their reputation, and they can decide which people can or can not be part of the league. I don't believe that particular point is really up for any debate.



KJ
k_j_88
k_j_88

Posts : 4747
Join date : 2013-01-06
Age : 35

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by dbrown4 Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:05 am

kj,

It comes down to an issue of respect for the law in question and how you treat that law when you choose to invoke it. Of course you can't say anything you want without consequences. Just like you can't go out and kill someone without consequences. Most civil people who live under the 1st Amendment get that and carry on their days knowing they can exercise that right at anytime with respect and responsibility and know they won't be thrown in jail.

However, given the current state of this country and the world for that matter, there are certain tactics that can be used to repress that 1st Amendment without one knowing it.

Now, I did not hear the full tape between DS and his girlfriend that got him in the hot water he is in. If I had to step back for a moment and analyze what I did or did not hear, I would say I did not hear the censor bleep at all, so that implies he didn't drop the n-bomb. That is very offensive when a white or non-black person says that in almost any context to a black person. What DS did say was he didn't want black people coming to games with his girlfriend. (And it's been so long since I heard it, I'm not even sure that is correct word for word) On the racist scale, I'm going to call that mildly objectionable and racist. Highly objectionable words or behavior are what you would hear if you went to a Klan rally. Mainly because those people not only say those things but have behind them the desire and willingness to take harmful actions based upon their beliefs.

If you agree with that, then you have to agree that the NBA acted correctly in the beginning by banning DS from the NBA, but the further action to force him to sell his team is irrational and an over-reaction. The perceived punishment does not fit the crime.

One tactic used when getting in any hot water discussion of a controversial topic, whether it be racism, homosexuality, abortion, gun rights, etc. is to immediately brand the person expressing a view differently than your own is to call you a racist or a homophobe, a baby killer or war monger. What that does to the debate is you are instantly forced to remove yourself from the conversation (if you are taking a minority/non-popular stance, definitely no pun intended) take offense (or defense) and start to question your own argument, even though it is completely rational and in no way shape or form racist or attacking homosexuals. You are merely having what is thought to be a civil discussion and just because the other person doesn't like what you said or disagrees passionately about what you said, it is the old "I win and I'm taking my ball home with me" argument. It is actually a very immature tactic, but people fall for it every day. So it continues until someone can come up with the correct approach.

The point is DS has a bid on the table for $2 BILLION! That's with a "B". And he is fighting that. Sorry Clipper fans. Your team is worth nowhere near that. So what is at issue is something far greater than money. My claim is it is the issue of free speech, love it or hate it and its implications. DS does need to apologize privately to the organization away from the cameras and turn over a new leaf. He needs to say what he said is wrong and that he will make every attempt to correct his behavior until the day he dies.

db
dbrown4
dbrown4

Posts : 5263
Join date : 2009-10-29
Age : 60

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by beat Mon Jul 28, 2014 9:16 am

DB

And to add (this is my opinion)

Those of old enough to remember a baseball player by the name of Curt Flood. In the 1960's he challenged and eventually won the long standing "reserve clause" that for years tied players to one team. Flood had player for years in St Louis and refused a trade to the Phillies. The matter went all the way to the supreme court and although they voted against removal of the reserve clause a couple years later the ruling was overturned and set up free agency as it exists today.

The reason I bring this up is that whatever rules a league may have they cannot supersede federal laws and the bill of rights. Curt Flood had a nice baseball career but will never be remembered for any of that. He will be remembered for challenging and eventually winning... (from a piece I researched.........)

"After 12 years in the major leagues," Flood wrote, "I do not feel that I am a piece of property to be bought and sold irrespective of my wishes." He wished to play in the 1970 season, the 31-year-old insisted, but not with Philadelphia, and he believed he had "a right to consider offers from other clubs before making any decision." When Kuhn denied his request, Flood sued him and Major League Baseball, alleging that the reserve clause violated antitrust laws as well as the 13th Amendment, which barred slavery and involuntary servitude.

Flood v. Kuhn went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where Flood's case was backed by the testimony of former players, such as Jackie Robinson. No active players agreed to testify, however, and the court ruled against Flood in a 5-3 decision in 1972. By that time, the Phillies had traded Flood to the Washington Senators, for whom he played only 13 games before retiring in 1971. Although unsuccessful, his historic challenge paved the way, for federal arbitration of salary demands, which the MLB organization agreed to in 1973. Two years later, an arbitrator effectively reversed the court's 1972 verdict, throwing out the reserve clause and opening the door for the modern free agency that exists today.




Even Augusta National had to let women members in eventually.

DS might be every name anyone wants to describe him, and perhaps even worse than that. BUT what he is alleged to have said seems rather mild in the grand scheme of things.

In my opinion I just do not see how the league can force him to sell the Clippers.

beat



beat
beat

Posts : 7032
Join date : 2009-10-13
Age : 70

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by k_j_88 Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:44 am

Beat,

But what in the constitution could keep Silver from giving Sterling the boot?



KJ
k_j_88
k_j_88

Posts : 4747
Join date : 2013-01-06
Age : 35

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by Outside Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:32 pm

Interesting thread. Aside from the emotion-packed aspect of Donald (and Shelley) Sterling's character, this situation is fascinating to me from a legal standpoint.

I'm not a lawyer. While I've written numerous posts that put me firmly in the anti-Sterling camp, I do think I can examine the legal aspects of the situation from a relatively objective standpoint.

As Sam pointed out, the law is not black-and-white in many cases but is open to interpretation, and this is one case where things are not cut and dried. I've looked for legal opinions amongst all the sideline commentary, and what I've found interesting is that the almost all of the opinions from actual lawyers that I've seen (if not all -- I haven't kept score) think that Sterling doesn't have a case.

I don't put ESPN legal analyst Lester Munson in that category because I don't know the reliability of his opinions on legal matters, he is not a lawyer from what I can tell, and one apparently reputable legal blog thinks Munson is a hack:

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/04/espn-legal-analyst-does-disservice-to-all-mankind/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Above_the_Law_%28blog%29

From my legal layman's point of view, what I find interesting is that there are so many potential aspects to the legal situation. Here's my take on some of them.

Constitutional issues, including freedom of speech and privacy. These are valid concerns, and Sterling was potentially wronged when the tape was released, but my understanding is that this aspect is irrelevant to the case.

Free speech is often misunderstood by some with political agendas to mean that a person can say what they want, no matter how objectionable or offensive. That's mostly true, with certain limitations (yelling "Fire" in a theater, threatening the president, harassment, slander, libel, and so on), but my understanding is that the constitutional right to freedom of speech protects a person from prosecution by the government for that speech; it doesn't mean you can't be fired from your job or suffer other consequences outside of government prosecution. You are free to say what you like, but the Constitution doesn't provide blanket protection from any and all consequences to that act, only that you can't be put in jail for your opinions.

Privacy is much more complicated issue and one that is ill-defined for the modern age. The winds are shifting back and forth on this issue, and this is an important issue of our time that is far from settled.

But in the end, I don't think freedom of speech or privacy play a part in Sterling's case because Sterling's ouster as an owner is based on the harm, economic and otherwise, done to the Clipper franchise and the league as a whole due to events such as sponsors pulling out, Clipper players, coaches, and staff potentially refusing to work for Sterling, and potential league-wide boycotts by players. The NBA's case rests on the fact that its constitution has several provisions that allow the league to impose penalties, including forcing an owner to sell, for causing harm to the league. The NBA won't argue that Sterling isn't allowed to say what he likes in private but instead that the reaction to the public revelation of his comments caused significant harm to the league.

If Sterling has a beef with his privacy rights being violated, then he can take that up with the party who released the tapes, but from the NBA's point of view, that is a separate issue and not related to its case against Sterling. Again, it's not whether the tape is admissible; it's the fact that harm is being done to the league because sponsors, players, and others objected to Sterling's continued presence as an owner once his opinions became public, however they became public.

Franchisor/franchisee relationship and property rights. Because Sterling owns the Clippers as a franchisee, he doesn't have the same property rights to the Clippers as someone does regarding a car, real estate, or other personal property. I haven't owned a franchise, but my understanding is that the franchisor usually has the power to force a franchisee to operate in a certain way or even force a franchisee to sell for often vague reasons. It's usually not in the franchisor's interest to force franchisees to sell, but it does happen. Here is an article describing a Dunkin' Donuts franchisee who was forced to sell:

http://www.mainefranchiseowners.org/a-dunkin-donuts-franchise-owner-had-his-business-taken-away-from-him-in-2009/

Reading the comments below the article, it appears that Dunkin' Donuts management figured a way to make a significant profit by forcing franchisees to sell because Dunkin' Donuts made a percentage every time a franchise was sold. The franchisee was ultimately powerless to stop it because of the legal nature of his relationship with the franchisor. As the article says, "In the end he lost because he says, 'The deck was stacked against me, and they held all the cards.' "

In Sterling's case, although an NBA team isn't a typical restaurant franchise, his property rights are severely limited because he is a franchisee, not an outright owner of the property.

Sterling family trust. Although Donald Sterling is the person designated with ownership authority in team and league matters, he isn't the actual owner of the team; the Sterling family trust is. That means ownership of the team, including the decision to sell, is held jointly by Donald and Shelly Sterling as co-owners of the trust, and legal provisions of the trust become a factor in the case. It adds a whole layer of complexity from a legal standpoint that is being played out in probate court to determine whether Shelly Sterling's agreement to sell the team to Steve Ballmer is valid. This is also where Donald Sterling's potential mental incompetency comes into play, though I could see this also being a factor in a case between Donald Sterling and the league.

Sterling family trust's agreement to indemnify the league against lawsuits related to her sale of the team. This could be a major coup for the league. On the surface, this means that the trust agrees to cover the cost of any judgments if Donald Sterling wins his lawsuit against the league, which means that Donald Sterling is essentially suing himself for damages (if he wins his $1 billion lawsuit, damages would be paid by the Sterling trust, not the league).

However, from Sterling's point of view, he can contest Shelly Sterling's authority to make the indemnification agreement and invalidate the agreement, thereby putting the league back on the hook for damages from the lawsuit.

Sterling forcing a vote by owners to oust him. The league would vastly prefer for the Clipper sale to Ballmer to go through without actually requiring a vote by owners to force Sterling to sell. Mark Cuban has been forthright enough to discuss this, and he has raised valid concerns about the precedent this would set for the league. If an owner can be forced to sell for this, what other reasons could the league use to force an owner to sell? League owners aren't angels, and some of them may hold opinions equally as objectionable as those voiced by Sterling. Even though Sterling may not have the property rights to prevent a sale, many owners are still sensitive to that issue and don't like the idea that they could be forced to sell what they regard as their property. The league would likely prevail and get 3/4 of the owners to agree on forcing Sterling out, mainly because their own financial interest is at risk with Sterling as an owner, but owners really, really, really want to avoid this going to an actual vote. Sterling knows this and wants to force the vote.

Sterling's scorched-earth tactics and airing dirty laundry on other owners. One of Donald Sterling's best cards isn't a legal one per se but more one of legal intimidation -- that other owners have said and done things as bad or worse than he has without being forced to sell and that he could force all that nasty stuff into the light, either as part of his current lawsuit against the league or in response to an actual vote by the owners against him.

As I mentioned above, Sterling's case is different, not because of the content of what he said, but because of the harm done by sponsors leaving and players boycotting. Other owners may have have said and done bad things, but since that hasn't resulted in an exodus of sponsors, threatened boycott by players, or other demonstrated harm to the league, the case against those owners doesn't rise to the level that Sterling's case does.

Still, there can be no doubt of Sterling's willingness to go down this road and inflict damage on other owners and the league, either as a way to prevent his ouster as owner or, failing that, as retribution for going against him. The reasoning here is that the league would compromise rather than allow that to happen and that Sterling could maintain ownership of the team, even if in a reduced capacity.


Last edited by Outside on Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
Outside
Outside

Posts : 3019
Join date : 2009-11-05

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by beat Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:45 pm

k_j_88 wrote:Beat,

But what in the constitution could keep Silver from giving Sterling the boot?



KJ

Where did I say they could not? They can BUT at what cost and what grounds and are they legal to do so? In my opinion they would loose in court if this actually goes that far.......and it sure looks headed that way.

We can almost all agree DS is no saint BUT for the league to strip him of the team or force a sale over a few uneducated words said in private is questionable for sure and unlike Outside to say that privacy has no bearing to me is still up in the air. I think ALL aspects of this are in play till they are not.

So even if the owners do vote him off the island............so what happens then? Stay tuned.

The courts will end up deciding this and we just need to wait and then either agree or not.
Money has power and DS has a lot of the former and perhaps some of the later.

beat

beat
beat

Posts : 7032
Join date : 2009-10-13
Age : 70

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by Outside Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:55 pm

beat wrote:We can almost all agree DS is no saint BUT for the league to strip him of the team or force a sale over a few uneducated words said in private is questionable for sure and unlike Outside to say that privacy has no bearing to me is still up in the air. I think ALL aspects of this are in play till they are not.
I absolutely agree that all aspects, including privacy, are in play. The purpose of my post was to describe various legal aspects of the situation and my understanding of the validity of various arguments regarding those issues.

Regarding privacy issues, my point is that the league can argue that it is irrelevant because they're not claiming that his private comments are responsible for the harm done to the league, but instead that reaction by sponsors, players, and others in response to Sterling's continued status as an owner is what is doing harm.
Outside
Outside

Posts : 3019
Join date : 2009-11-05

Back to top Go down

Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays? Empty Re: Doc to Leave if Sterling Stays?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum