Judge orders arbitration in WVU case

[businesslawyer]

So sorry to offend the high and mighty legal expert. But, neither you or me or anyone that posts here can claim that it is not valid since we do not have access to nor were we witness to any of the internal workings of the BE as it relates to WVU. Whether it has legal basis or not, isn't that up to someone else to decide?

WVU has to have something it is hanging its hat on. They are moving ahead far too confidently to be basing it on nothing but hope. And I am not willing to say that the possibility of them walking in 2012 (with Pitt and Cuse right on their tail) is not going to happen just because you think it has no legal basis. I used to be 100% convinced that a company was not a person but multiple courts have shown that conviction to be wrong.

Thank you for telling me how to interpret legal papers. I can't imagine how I've made it so far without your help.

1. Their claim (that they are allowed to leave now without being responsible for damages) is frivolous. They allege facts that, even if true, do not support a legal theory that gives them a right to leave. Sorry to offend you by being certain, since you've determined that anything is possible, but it wouldn't take a lawyer with more than a third grade education to determine that. Which is why I don't believe for a minute that WVU or the Big XII think they are winning.

2. It is never certain that an injunction will issue. I have said that on this board fifty times. I think it should based on my understanding of the facts, but no lawyer ever counts on that.

 

[CL82]

It's always hard to guess what people's motivations are, but I think that either WVU's deal with the B12 was that they would make a good faith effort to leave and the suit is there way of meeting that representation or WVU had zero respect for "Marinate" and figure he'd fold like a cheap suit.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Having a high opinion or your own opinion is basically the first two years of law school.

And, the 3rd year is basically securing an opportunity where some people enable one to suck up your high opinion of oneself and perform some grunt work for a while.

 

[uconnfan68]

Thank you for telling me how to interpret legal papers. I can't imagine how I've made it so far without your help.

1. Their claim (that they are allowed to leave now without being responsible for damages) is frivolous. They allege facts that, even if true, do not support a legal theory that gives them a right to leave. Sorry to offend you by being certain, since you've determined that anything is possible, but it wouldn't take a lawyer with more than a third grade education to determine that. Which is why I don't believe for a minute that WVU or the Big XII think they are winning.

2. It is never certain that an injunction will issue. I have said that on this board fifty times. I think it should based on my understanding of the facts, but no lawyer ever counts on that.

I see you did very well those first two years. ;^)

 

[Fishy]

I have now decided that I am an attorney.

Let's be honest - in some Third World countries, they'd probably let me be a doctor if I felt like it. I have moxie and I have memorized that 'thigh bone's connected to the shin bone' song. And a Third World doctor is easily qualified to be a First World lawyer. Let's call a spade a spade - none of you strike me as Perry Mason reborn and you don't seem to be starving to death, so boom, I am a lawyer.

In my opinion, which I will file with the court as amicus curiae, bibo ergo sum and coffea arrabica, West Virginia's argument is that they really, really want to leave. I don't know what the Latin term for 'pretty please' is, but I'll wager that West Virginia's lawyers don't either.

For that reason, and because they have scribbled their WVU's all over a glut of documents that say "We will not leave without 27 months notice", they will be forced to stay.

E pluribus unum and good night.

 

[gars44]

So sorry to offend the high and mighty legal expert. But, neither you or me or anyone that posts here can claim that it is not valid since we do not have access to nor were we witness to any of the internal workings of the BE as it relates to WVU. Whether it has legal basis or not, isn't that up to someone else to decide?

WVU has to have something it is hanging its hat on. They are moving ahead far too confidently to be basing it on nothing but hope. And I am not willing to say that the possibility of them walking in 2012 (with Pitt and Cuse right on their tail) is not going to happen just because you think it has no legal basis. I used to be 100% convinced that a company was not a person but multiple courts have shown that conviction to be wrong.

I don't think they have anything to hang their hats on. I think you are ascribing to WV way too much logic, because to normal people, like you and me and the rest of the world, like to think an organization - supposedly devoted to the education of young minds - and run by people with college degrees - would not take such bold and outlandish positions without some merit, somewhere, in the particular position. That's a rule of logic - people act rationally - that is so often violated in real life. We like to believe, it makes the world a little safer. But I don't think WVU has any position at all. I think they they are acting in pure survival mode, real or perceived. Maybe real. "We have to get out of here for our safety and survival. It's like we are trapped in a collapsed mine shaft. If we don't get out of here, take risks to get out of here, we are going to die right here. We have to do it before the Big12 changes its mind, or something else happens over there, we have to do it now. It is going to be dangerous, costly, we are going to pay, we might not make any money for a couple of years due to the damages we will have to pay, but we have to do this. And we will do this. The cost of not doing it is greater than the cost of doing it." This is a trait peculiar to West Virginians, something they all understand. The parable of the mine. They are miners. I remember Ollie Luck stating a few months before they bolted, "The University of West Virginia is, and will remain, a relevant player in the national landscape."

Something like that. And he meant it. And I think they are leaving.

 

[gars44]

I have now decided that I am an attorney.

Let's be honest - in some Third World countries, they'd probably let me be a doctor if I felt like it. I have moxie and I have memorized that 'thigh bone's connected to the shin bone' song. And a Third World doctor is easily qualified to be a First World lawyer. Let's call a spade a spade - none of you strike me as Perry Mason reborn and you don't seem to be starving to death, so boom, I am a lawyer.

In my opinion, which I will file with the court as amicus curiae, bibo ergo sum and coffea arrabica, West Virginia's argument is that they really, really want to leave. I don't know what the Latin term for 'pretty please' is, but I'll wager that West Virginia's lawyers don't either.

For that reason, and because they have scribbled their WVU's all over a glut of documents that say "We will not leave without 27 months notice", they will be forced to stay.

E pluribus unum and good night.

LOL. Why are you going to bed? Take another hit of Meth. It's only 2:47 a.m. for heaven's sake. I agree. They really really really really want to leave. That, in a nutshell, is the argument. And I continue to believe that it will be a winner. Not without costs, but they have resigned to accept those costs.

 

[TRest]

LOL. Why are you going to bed? Take another hit of Meth. It's only 2:47 a.m. for heaven's sake. I agree. They really really really really want to leave. That, in a nutshell, is the argument. And I continue to believe that it will be a winner. Not without costs, but they have resigned to accept those costs.

They are willing to burn down the campus to keep the football program relevant. It's as simple as that.

 

[IthacaMatt]

No. The two standards for an injunction -- likelihood of success on the merits and irreperable harm. The Big East will easily establish likelihood of success on the merits. I think establishing irreperable harm for 13-14, with replacement schools coming in that year anyway, may be problematic. I think irreperable harm for 12-13 is, frankly, self-evident.

We are all free to ignore every contract we sign. It's not a law, subject to criminal prosecution, that you fulfill your contracts. When you break one, you are subject to damages and, in the limited situations where grounds for an injunction lie, specific performance.

You're completely dismissing WV's arguments that the Big East worked against their interests and harmed the value of their media properties with the terrible way the conference handled the defections, and allowed the basketball schools to essentially dictate the terms of negotiation about adding new members to the football schools' detriment. There is something there. Maybe not enough to justify WV's breach of contract, but this isn't an automatic slam dunk for the conference in my opinion. Marinatto's conduct has been awful, and is well documented in the media.

 

[Jericho]

You're completely dismissing WV's arguments that the Big East worked against their interests and harmed the value of their media properties with the terrible way the conference handled the defections, and allowed the basketball schools to essentially dictate the terms of negotiation about adding new members to the football schools' detriment. There is something there. Maybe not enough to justify WV's breach of contract, but this isn't an automatic slam dunk for the conference in my opinion. Marinatto's conduct has been awful, and is well documented in the media.

Here's the thing. While the Big East is an entity, it is governed by things like bylaws. So when you say the Big East "worked against their interests" and "allowed the basketball schools to essentially dictate the terms of negotiation", its because the Big East was following its own internal rules. Rules that West Virginia was aware of an signed off on when they joined.

Not to mention, running a business in a manner is not per se illegal. People make bad business decisions all the time. To show it to be illegal, such as a breach of a fiduciary duty, you have to meet a pretty high standard. And usually have to show specific conflicts of interest and bias. And even then, it might not be illegal. There's something in law known as the business judgment rule which basically makes the presumption that any act taken by the business is valid. That's the legal hurdle you have to overcome.

Honestly, while people complain after the fact on how the Big East was run, I'm not really sure what the Big East could have done in the last 10 years to avoid this. Sure, people have their theories. And sure, they don't like what the Big East actually did do. But this seems to be something that was building for 25 plus years and simply came to a conclusion recently. When the Big East ignored football and Penn State in the 1980s, it has basically led to this moment now. At least that's the way I look at it.

 

[businesslawyer]

You're completely dismissing WV's arguments that the Big East worked against their interests and harmed the value of their media properties with the terrible way the conference handled the defections, and allowed the basketball schools to essentially dictate the terms of negotiation about adding new members to the football schools' detriment. There is something there. Maybe not enough to justify WV's breach of contract, but this isn't an automatic slam dunk for the conference in my opinion. Marinatto's conduct has been awful, and is well documented in the media.

Yes, I am dismissing it. Because legally that is no argument whatsoever, And something as a legal matter isn't "there" just because it's typed on an internet board or argued by a lawyer. You do not have a legal right to breach a contract because your counterparty did a bad job. Their remedy to Providence being incompetent, if they were, was to give 27 months notice and leave or to elect a better Commissioner.

 

[Pudge]

Here is my Scorecard:

UConn = Great job since 2004. Probably a B+/A- ... Attendance & Brand are way up.
Rutgers (and I love Schiano NOW) = Great job since 2004. Probably a B+/A- Attendance & Brand are way up.
Cincinnati = Great job since 2004. Probably a A- .... Attendance, excitement & Brand are way up.
Louisville = Mixed ... but Great job lately. They are risen & persevered. Probably a B+ with Strong rising.
USF = Great job since 2004 in spite of some scary WTF losses. Attendance, excitement & future are all good. B+

WVU = It's a solid Program that overcomes even their minor hiccups. They would in virtually any conference. Great job. A.

Pitt = Modest return on Investment. Not overly impressed with them reaching their potential.
SU (Ithaca Matt's team) = Sh+tty Performance. Far worse than he thought Marinatto has done. Took a brand & basically flushed it in a 5 year period. Marrone? Some of them are ready to jump that ship.

SEE - my point is twofold: ACC'Swofford keeps making the Rivals/Scout mistake of believing the hype. BC - Pitt- SU have limited ceilings. I think others ... and frankly this cartel of BCS is hoohah ... can overcome any of these. Marinatto, whatever Ithaca Matt believes, did a functionary job. SU ... and the others ... had the ability to drive this conference. But, the story is the Newbies ... and the story going forward will be Boise, SMU, Houston ... and it will be far better in 8 years; and SU will flatline.

I feel for WVU. They work their tails off. But, they chose to play in a Texas league. That is desperate & their litigation will cost them dearly. I say WE ARE the NEW American Football League ... let the exciting Newbies take off.

 

[Waquoit]

I feel for WVU. They work their tails off. But, they chose to play in a Texas league. That is desperate & their litigation will cost them dearly. I say WE ARE the NEW American Football League ... let the exciting Newbies take off.

Keep posting, Pudge. I just might start feeling better about all this.

 

[ctchamps]

I have now decided that I am an attorney.

Let's be honest - in some Third World countries, they'd probably let me be a doctor if I felt like it. I have moxie and I have memorized that 'thigh bone's connected to the shin bone' song. And a Third World doctor is easily qualified to be a First World lawyer. Let's call a spade a spade - none of you strike me as Perry Mason reborn and you don't seem to be starving to death, so boom, I am a lawyer.

In my opinion, which I will file with the court as amicus curiae, bibo ergo sum and coffea arrabica, West Virginia's argument is that they really, really want to leave. I don't know what the Latin term for 'pretty please' is, but I'll wager that West Virginia's lawyers don't either.

For that reason, and because they have scribbled their WVU's all over a glut of documents that say "We will not leave without 27 months notice", they will be forced to stay.

E pluribus unum and good night.

The latin phrase for that is BEGUS HARDERUS!!

 

[IthacaMatt]

Yes, I am dismissing it. Because legally that is no argument whatsoever, And something as a legal matter isn't "there" just because it's typed on an internet board or argued by a lawyer. You do not have a legal right to breach a contract because your counterparty did a bad job. Their remedy to Providence being incompetent, if they were, was to give 27 months notice and leave or to elect a better Commissioner.

You really are an balloon knot. You must be a pleasure to work with. You must also be a really, really good lawyer, to never look to the strength in the other side's argument before dismissing it.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Yes, I am dismissing it. Because legally that is no argument whatsoever, And something as a legal matter isn't "there" just because it's typed on an internet board or argued by a lawyer. You do not have a legal right to breach a contract because your counterparty did a bad job. Their remedy to Providence being incompetent, if they were, was to give 27 months notice and leave or to elect a better Commissioner.

Dude, the hoops onlies were in charge of negotiating the football package and had the ability to outvote the football schools, and had Notre Dame chairing the committee, who is a walking, talking conflict of interest, since they won't join the conference for football.

If you don't think that has any merit whatsoever, then you're just not trying to see both sides of the case.

 

[husky10]

I have a few questions BL if I may pick your brain, Does the court system in this case have the authority to tell WV that they have to play in the BE next year? If yes how would they enforce the ruling? Would they send send authorities to force WVU to oblige or just level heavy fines against the University for not following their ruling?

If it is not the case and the court cannot force WVU to remain in the BE could the damages be costly enough to the university that it forces WVU to remain in the BE as going to B12 no longer makes financial sense?

If you are not fully aware of all the laws that would be involved in this case im just asking you to make an informed decision.

 

[uc1974]

Matt-

You are being convinced of the correctness of your position by something called irrelevant collateral argument. Just because the Big East may not be operated in an ideal fashion does not create a whole series of other rights, such as the ability to void a contract concerning notice. When I was a judge this was a common tactic by lay parties and by some attorneys who thought they might try to distract me from the real issue. Absent some gross
or intentional negligence on the part of the Big East this will be ignored by the fact finder. The issuance of multiple subpoenas (shotgunning) is also often used as a distraction tactic although it is valid to the point in some cases. I do believe WVA judges are elected which may make them more prone to rationalize nonsense but I don't know that for a fact.

 

[businesslawyer]

You really are an *******. You must be a pleasure to work with. You must also be a really, really good lawyer, to never look to the strength in the other side's argument before dismissing it.

I did look at it. I read both side's briefs and consider them. Why would I be a bad lawyer merely for having a strong position?

Oh -- because it disagrees with your hopes. Yeah, my career has suffered for that.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I did look at it. I read both side's briefs and consider them. Why would I be a bad lawyer merely for having a strong position?

Oh -- because it disagrees with your hopes. Yeah, my career has suffered for that.

No, it's because your dismissal of WVU's position has been knee jerk, regardless of the question, in a psycho ditched girlfriend kind of way on this whole topic, for several months now. You shout down and insult everyone on this board. I've been reading long enough to know that.

 

[businesslawyer]

No, it's because your dismissal of WVU's position has been knee jerk, regardless of the question, in a psycho ditched girlfriend kind of way on this whole topic, for several months now. You shout down and insult everyone on this board. I've been reading long enough to know that.

Umh --- no. I have not taken strong stands on which court or courts would hear the case, or WVU's sovereign immunity, because I am not a litigator. And I have made clear that no one can ever count on an injunction being issued. I do know more than enough contract law and business organization law to know WVU's claims on the substance of the matter -- that they can leave now because Marinatto cashed their check, or didn't do a good enough job -- are without merit.

I'm sorry that it offends your sensibilities that someone who has been a business lawyer for over twenty five years and has achieved a great deal professionally and lectures to national audiences all the time feels comfortable taking a strong position on what is substantively a frivolous case. And doesn't feel that every opinion a layman has on the matter is worth seriously considering. But, ultimately, that is your issue and not mine.

 

[zls44]

Umh --- no. I have not taken strong stands on which court or courts would hear the case, or WVU's sovereign immunity, because I am not a litigator. And I have made clear that no one can ever count on an injunction being issued. I do know more than enough contract law and business organization law to know WVU's claims on the substance of the matter -- that they can leave now because Marinatto cashed their check, or didn't do a good enough job -- are without merit.

I'm sorry that it offends your sensibilities that someone who has been a business lawyer for over twenty five years and has achieved a great deal professionally and lectures to national audiences all the time feels comfortable taking a strong position on what is substantively a frivolous case. And doesn't feel that every opinion a layman has on the matter is worth seriously considering. But, ultimately, that is your issue and not mine.

Biz just dropped the mic and walked away.

 

[Pudge]

IthacaMatt & all the Townie Yahoos of Central NY think they are fully self-justified for bad behavior. And, their underwhelming football from 2003 on has earned Dr Gross an elevated status. What BL is stating is the rational legal posture: stating that the BE was badly run or poorly structured is simply irrelevant to what is being argued by the WVU legal team (pushed by scum Oliver Luck). You want to breach your contractual obligations because ... you are making up stuff. Again, maybe WV judges can help. But, the very idea that you can run away like this is absolutely worthy of Texas businessmen & WV are landing in the right place. They will find, as many do, that they are dealing with a whole different level of scoundrel.

Syracuse fans (sometimes their alums) think that they are due this Membership. Swofford, to me, has repeatedly made ballsy moves that aren't quite supported by Market information nor projection into future trends. Syracuse will never get a new stadium from NYS. CNY/Syracuse is a declining demographic (worse now than Buffalo) & NOT NYC by any stretch. TV audience? No one in Albany or Buffalo watches them in any big numbers. Whereas UConn ... and Rutgers ... have better prospects. So, like BC, we see entrance into this cartel that is unwarranted by core analysis. I see nothing but 20 years of animus. I see University presidents in over their heads in nasty business. And, this ain't over.