The OKC Sonics? No so fast, Bennett...

[TampaDude]

The plot thickens...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3347564

[TampaDude]

Dammit!

Do you live in OKC? If so, your screen name is so wrong... :lol

[MajorMike]

Going to be interesting. The problem with the lawsuit is that the entire phrase hangs on one statement: "I am a man possessed! Will do everything we can. Thanks for hanging with me boys."

That statement, it can be argued, could be construed in one of a million ways. The plaintiff will have to prove the intent of that statement was to tell Ward that he was moving to move them ASAP.

The defense will argue that the response was directly linked to the posed question, "whether there was any way to avoid further "lame duck" seasons in Seattle before the team could be relocated" by ensuring the season would be productive and not "lame duck."

[FromWayDowntown]

Going to be interesting. The problem with the lawsuit is that the entire phrase hangs on one statement: "I am a man possessed! Will do everything we can. Thanks for hanging with me boys."

That statement, it can be argued, could be construed in one of a million ways. The plaintiff will have to prove the intent of that statement was to tell Ward that he was moving to move them ASAP.

The defense will argue that the response was directly linked to the posed question, "whether there was any way to avoid further "lame duck" seasons in Seattle before the team could be relocated" by ensuring the season would be productive and not "lame duck."

All of that might be true, but that statement might be enough to get a court to grant an injunction, pending trial, to prohibit the move of the team, which could be a significant blow to Bennett and his group. To get an injunction, the plaintiff would only need to show that it had a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim -- the tie in those situations usually goes to the party seeking the injunction and if the issue comes down to which side is more likely to persuade a jury on the construction of that statement (or the construction of the various e-mails from the Bennett group) then it seems fairly likely that the plaintiffs could at least block the move for a year or so. That might be enough time to let the climate in Seattle change a bit and might fundamentally change the equation with regard to a move to OKC.

[balli]

TrueHoop linked to a good legal argument which appears to bode well for Shultz. Fuck David stern and Bennett. I hope the court bitch-slaps their asses.

http://www.enjoytheenjoyment.com/2008/04/schultz-letter-interview-with-kjr.html (http://)


Back when we originally considered whether Howard Schultz could sue Clay Bennett, the legal expert I spoke to, Professor Joel Ngugi, said this was the main unknown: "There will be a real question here whether the side agreement became part of the sale agreement."

Now, Mitch Levy of KJR played an interview with Schultz from the day of the sale, in which Schultz plainly states that the side agreement was indeed a very important part of the sale agreement.

So this morning I went back to Professor Ngugi--does this shed any light on whether the agreement will be enforceable?

"Yes it does," he told me, "in three ways."

"Firstly, the fact that Howard made this statement on the day of the deal could be accepted in evidence to demonstrate the "true" meaning of the obligations Bennett & Co. had assumed. Howard's statement, thus, could be useful as extrinsic evidence to establish what 'good faith' meant to the parties at the time they signed their contract."

"Secondly, it seems important that Howard used very specific legal language namely 'best efforts.' If this language was actually included in the contract, it imposes a very high burden on Bennett & Co. It not only obligates them to act diligently and cooperatively to accomplish the purpose of the contract, but an express 'best efforts' clause would impose a higher burden that rises to near fiduciary level of obligation. This would make it easier to prove a breach of 'good faith' efforts clause.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, that Howard made this statement might be used to demonstrate that the 'good faith' obligation assumed by Bennett & Co. was a 'material' part of the deal. This is important because if a court finds that it was 'material,' then a breach entitles Howard & Co. not just to damages but to rescission (i.e. cancellation or 'unwinding') of the contract."

So if the breach of the contract is so bad that it's considered a "material" breach, Ngugi wrote, the contract can be unwound.

But what constitutes a material breach?

"Some of the factors considered in determining whether a breach is material or not include the extent to which the non-breaching party will be deprived of the benefit she reasonably expected from the deal; the extent to which she can adequately compensated with money; and, the extent to which the breaching party acted in 'bad faith.'

"It is by no means clear that a court would necessarily hold the 'good faith clause' in the Sonics contract to be a 'material' term to entitle Howard & Co. to rescind the contract if they are so inclined--but the fact that Howard thought it important enough to make this statement on the day the deal was made would be evidence that this part was the deal was considered 'material' by the parties."

[Indazone]

Where is this being heard? In a Seattle Court? Well we know what the outcome of that'll be lol.

[Budkin]

This is fucking awesome. I am 100% in support of the Sonics and their fans in Seattle. Even though they had Ray Allen on their team and even though they cheered when Timmy went down in the 2005 playoffs. This bullshit needs to end. The Sonics fans deserve to keep their team. Imagine how we would feel if someone was trying to take the Spurs away from us. Go buy a Venti Mocha (or whatever your drink of choice is) at Starbucks tonight and support Howard Schultz and the Sonics! Shawn Kemp will thank you personally!

[Findog]

This is fucking awesome. I am 100% in support of the Sonics and their fans in Seattle. Even though they had Ray Allen on their team and even though they cheered when Timmy went down in the 2005 playoffs.

I keep hearing this about them booing Timmy. How many fans in the arena did that? I don't know if you can tar an entire fanbase with that. Otherwise agree that they don't deserve to lose their team.

[Findog]

How fucking stupid is Stern that he'd rather be in the OKC market than Seattle?

Oh, that's right, it sets a dangerous precedent when a city tells a team to take its unreasonable demands for a taxpayer-financed facility and stick it where the sun don't shine, and somehow gets away with it.

[RonMexico]

I think the relocation costs would be much lower if the Mavericks moved there.

Just a thought.

[FromWayDowntown]

I keep hearing this about them booing Timmy. How many fans in the arena did that? I don't know if you can tar an entire fanbase with that. Otherwise agree that they don't deserve to lose their team.

My recollection of that event was that the booing sounded quite pervasive and lusty. My recollection is informed, to an extent, by the fact that I was at Key Arena a few days before for Game #4 and experienced the hostility to most of the Spurs from that Sonics crowd during the early portions of that game (the game itself was a blowout win by the Sonics and the fans were more celebratory than venomous for most of the 2nd half, as I recall). It made perfect sense to me at the time that the booing showered upon the injured Tim Duncan wasn't just a few fans making a lot of noise.

With that said, I have every hope that someone will figure out a way to keep this team in Seattle. The NBA has a good history -- though, perhaps not an entirely rich history -- in that city. It's pretty apparent that the only thing that supports moving the Sonics at all is the inability to work out a deal for a new building, but it's awfully difficult to work out a deal with an ownership group that is wholly unwilling to shoulder any portion of the bill because it has no interest in keeping the team in the City. Bennett and his group strike me as predatory scumbags in a way, but that's business. Still, I would be very happy to see their efforts to vulture that club fail.

[RonMexico]

It was all Wilkins in that series.

[Trainwreck2100]

Imagine how we would feel if someone was trying to take the Spurs away from us. Go buy a Venti Mocha (or whatever your drink of choice is) at Starbucks tonight and support Howard Schultz and the Sonics! Shawn Kemp will thank you personally!


New Orleans tried to woo the Spurs in the early part of this decade, and then bitched when we went after the Saints.

[Obstructed_View]

I keep hearing this about them booing Timmy. How many fans in the arena did that? I don't know if you can tar an entire fanbase with that. Otherwise agree that they don't deserve to lose their team.
Just to clarify, they cheered when he turned his ankle and they booed when he got up from it. It wasn't a smattering of applause, it was the loudest cheer they made in the second half of that game and they were clearly disappointed that he wasn't hurt more than he was. If it wasn't the entire crowd it was enough for everybody to know what they were doing. Timmy certainly did, and he made sure to knock the Sonics out with that little bank shot over Potapenko. It's the most angry I've ever seen him.