Clippers: Donald Sterling Banned For Life!!!

[jimbo]

The power to terminate is limited to things like gambling and fraud in the application for ownership, but it also includes a provision for termination when an owner "fails to fulfill" a "contractual obligation" in "such a way as to affect the [NBA] or its members adversely." Silver and the owners could assert that Sterling's statements violated the cons ution's requirements to conduct business on a "reasonable" and "ethical" level.

This is basically what FWD was alluding to, and what Silver also mentioned. The fact that the Clippers (and by association, the league), lost sponsorship over his actions, would seem to fit the bill.

Obviously the threshold is high, but it doesn't look like there's a legal impediment to do it.

Well now they actually released the bylaws, I'm not gonna scour through it line by line or anything. Someone else on the internet'll do it.

http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/me...nd-By-Laws.pdf

So Silver fined him under 24l. (For his "ban") I'm not sure what rule he broke that has no specific penalty though.

(l) The Commissioner shall, wherever there is a rule for which no penalty is specifically fixed for violation thereof, have the authority to fix such penalty as in the Commissioner’s judgment shall be in the best interests of the Association. Where a situation arises which is not covered in the Cons ution and By-Laws, the Commissioner shall have the authority to make such decision, including the imposition of a penalty, as in his judgment shall be in the best interests of the Association. The penalty that may be assessed under the preceding two sentences may include, without limitation, a fine, suspension, and/or the forfeiture or assignment of draft choices. No monetary penalty fixed under this provision shall exceed $2,500,000.

and then this might be the rule that he's going after for the "contractual obligation" part to "terminate" his membership


35A (c)

(c) Any person who gives, makes, issues, authorizes or endorses any statement having, or designed to have, an effect prejudicial or detrimental to the best interests of basketball or of the Association or of a Member or its Team, shall be liable to a fine not exceeding $1,000,000 to be imposed by the Commissioner. The Member whose Owner, Officer, Manager, Coach or other employee has been so fined shall pay the amount of the fine should such person fail to do so within ten (10) days of its imposition.

Or I'd guess its a part of another agreement they have, in that case we don't know anything.

Then we have the termination part itself

(a) Willfully violate any of the provisions of the Cons ution and By-Laws, resolutions, or agreements of the Association.

or

(d) Fail or refuse to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association, its Members, Players, or any other third party in such a way as to affect the Association or its Members adversely.

I know I wouldn't be certain that I could get Sterling on the "willfully" part in 13a. Silver has to have a whole lot of confidence coming from somewhere if he's saying he wants to oust Sterling without even talking to all the owners, so it has to be something regarding 13d. I've got no idea what.

Silver and the owners could assert that Sterling's statements violated the cons ution's requirements to conduct business on a "reasonable" and "ethical" level.

I don't know where this is from (it's not in the cons ution the NBA released) or if Silver is even relying on it. I doubt it, it doesn't seem to match how confident Silver is acting right now. I'm sure you could come up with a few counterarguments to defend Sterling.

This is basically what FWD was alluding to, and what Silver also mentioned. The fact that the Clippers (and by association, the league), lost sponsorship over his actions, would seem to fit the bill.

I get that line of reasoning for banning or terminating him, I just don't know where specifically in their cons ution it's at. You'd think they'd have to have more evidence than just the lost sponsorships to say it's a reasonable application of joint partner inter-en y rules. I don't know the values of those contracts, but you'd think they'd pale in comparison to the value of the Clippers. (And potentially the revenue Sterling would lose by a forced sale)

I was just saying that even with a valid reason for terminating him like you're describing, the an rust claims have the potential to make this a messy process spanning a few years. I've got no idea on how the specifics'll play out. The huge undervaluation of the Clippers might hurt them. The NBA'll be able to easily get over what they're valued at, so how is Sterling going to be able to claim that he's getting underpaid? Plenty of arguments to be made, I'm just curious on how it'll turn out. I'm excited about it tbh.

[Infinite_limit]

NBA 2014 RIP

I'm finished. I won't watch as people that hate the color of my skin make millions of dollars bouncing a ball

[Spurs9]

Was listening to it earlier

Great vid

[Infinite_limit]

People still watch ESPN?

[DieHardSpursFan1537]

[TDMVPDPOY]

the black community might have win today, yet they wiill not take todays win and move forward to improve themselves

they will continue to sit back and hold onto that monopoly card

[Infinite_limit]

This is OJ Simpson all over again

[TDMVPDPOY]

This is OJ Simpson all over again

this reminds me of acmilans president who organize sex orgies with underage girls, yet nothing happen to him...just resign and move on

[Thebesteva]

Floyd Mayweather now interested in buying the Clippers LOL a racist replacing a racist

[ElNono]

I get that line of reasoning for banning or terminating him, I just don't know where specifically in their cons ution it's at. You'd think they'd have to have more evidence than just the lost sponsorships to say it's a reasonable application of joint partner inter-en y rules. I don't know the values of those contracts, but you'd think they'd pale in comparison to the value of the Clippers. (And potentially the revenue Sterling would lose by a forced sale)

I was just saying that even with a valid reason for terminating him like you're describing, the an rust claims have the potential to make this a messy process spanning a few years. I've got no idea on how the specifics'll play out. The huge undervaluation of the Clippers might hurt them. The NBA'll be able to easily get over what they're valued at, so how is Sterling going to be able to claim that he's getting underpaid? Plenty of arguments to be made, I'm just curious on how it'll turn out. I'm excited about it tbh.

If a judge agrees that the commish decisions are as good as any arbitration ruling, then Sterling is toast. And the precedent is on the arbitration side, all the way to the Supreme Court.

I'm just thinking they could negotiate a way out. Perhaps create a trust owned by his wife and son, and move ownership there. He makes a lot of money off other businesses, so this is more about keeping the team in the family than him specifically.

[baseline bum]

Floyd Mayweather now interested in buying the Clippers LOL a racist replacing a racist

Gonna be just as bankrupt as Pacquiao in 5 years.

[Kobe_5_Duncan_4]

Spurfan are the stupidest s on the planet

[Thebesteva]

Gonna be just as bankrupt as Pacquiao in 5 years.

I think Pac will have $ before May does

[TDMVPDPOY]

Floyd Mayweather now interested in buying the Clippers LOL a racist replacing a racist

no way sterling is letting this sell for anything less then 2b when magic is also interested after his group did s ed out 2b for a baseball team...

[Clipper Nation]

[Jacob1983]

I wonder if Silver has ever said the n-word behind closed doors? If so, should his life be destroyed?

[Baam]

I wonder if Silver has ever said the n-word behind closed doors? If so, should his life be destroyed?

Cuban looks like the smartest mofo of the bunch saying it sets a dangerous precedent... Especially since we're virtually recorded h24...

[Jacob1983]

I think Cuban would be the next owner to go on the next episode of NBA Owner Witch Hunt.

I just laugh at all the judging and stoning. All these black people acting like they've never said or are incapable of saying anything offensive and/or hurtful. Hilarious.

[LkrFan]

New logo unveiled:

[LkrFan]

[Franklin]

Monkeyball's dad is a cuckold I guess. Monkeyball doesn't look black at all (regardless of his athleticism).

[Franklin]

Also, banning an 81yr old for life doesn't sound any harsher than hanging a dead dog.

[ChumpDumper]

lol ST racists in mourning

[jimbo]

If a judge agrees that the commish decisions are as good as any arbitration ruling, then Sterling is toast. And the precedent is on the arbitration side, all the way to the Supreme Court.

I'm just thinking they could negotiate a way out. Perhaps create a trust owned by his wife and son, and move ownership there. He makes a lot of money off other businesses, so this is more about keeping the team in the family than him specifically.

Silver's decisions are already as good as an arbitration ruling because he's the NBA's final arbiter. So the award will be confirmed in court. And are you talking about precedent for an rust rulings being able to be arbitrated or for arbitration awards being (almost always) final? I think almost everyone has accepted that Sterling isn't getting the ban undone. That's final.

As for the an rust claim, this is where I'm confused on what'll happen. I don't know if whatever arbitration agreement Sterling has with the NBA actually does encompass an rust violations. If it does, Silver shouldn't be able to be the arbiter because of the conflict of interest. At that point I'd guess Sterling could choose to go through the arbitration process (if it exists) or he could claim that the provision used to terminate him was unlawful (and therefore unenforceable) because the an rust implications. If this isn't covered by the arbitration agreement, he can sue because the waiver of recourse wouldn't extend to an rust claims.

& yeah I think he'd want to keep the team in the family. I doubt he'd be able to do it though since the NBA still has to approve an ownership transfer, but it could help with his an rust claims. I don't even have a clue about the tax law implications, but with a trust or him transferring enough money to his wife to make a bid on the Clippers if the NBA were to block the bid that would be another area where they could point out an illegal restraint of trade. (fwiw, I haven't read the part about the cons ution regarding new membership and how they'd block it)

Additionally, there was someone talking about how there were huge tax implications if Sterling were to sell now vs if he passed it onto his family in his will. Selling now he'd get taxed on the net revenue from the Clippers sale (1 bil - the sub 20 mil or whatever he paid) whereas if he passed it to his family in his will the original value would be changed to market price (1 bil - 1 bil) and so they'd only have to deal with estate taxes instead.

So it's in his best interest to get an injunction and keep this stretched out as long as possible to save a whole lot of money in taxes if he dies before it's settled. One theory I read was for him to divorce his wife who would then be en led to half of the Clippers. I don't know how they'd even deal with that especially given that she hasn't done anything wrong. At the very least it drags out the process.

[ElNono]

Silver's decisions are already as good as an arbitration ruling because he's the NBA's final arbiter. So the award will be confirmed in court. And are you talking about precedent for an rust rulings being able to be arbitrated or for arbitration awards being (almost always) final? I think almost everyone has accepted that Sterling isn't getting the ban undone. That's final.

As for the an rust claim, this is where I'm confused on what'll happen. I don't know if whatever arbitration agreement Sterling has with the NBA actually does encompass an rust violations. If it does, Silver shouldn't be able to be the arbiter because of the conflict of interest. At that point I'd guess Sterling could choose to go through the arbitration process (if it exists) or he could claim that the provision used to terminate him was unlawful (and therefore unenforceable) because the an rust implications. If this isn't covered by the arbitration agreement, he can sue because the waiver of recourse wouldn't extend to an rust claims.

The bylaws he agreed to implicitly says he cannot challenge in a court of law. Doesn't make exceptions of any kind. I'm sure he'll try to litigate that, but it's going to be difficult for a guy that's been the longest tenured owner living under those rules to now turn around and challenge them (IMO). The NBA might also don't want to drag the bylaws into court oversight, since that could up the entire league for a while, so we'll see. Maybe a settlement of sorts is in the horizon.

& yeah I think he'd want to keep the team in the family. I doubt he'd be able to do it though since the NBA still has to approve an ownership transfer, but it could help with his an rust claims. I don't even have a clue about the tax law implications, but with a trust or him transferring enough money to his wife to make a bid on the Clippers if the NBA were to block the bid that would be another area where they could point out an illegal restraint of trade. (fwiw, I haven't read the part about the cons ution regarding new membership and how they'd block it)

Additionally, there was someone talking about how there were huge tax implications if Sterling were to sell now vs if he passed it onto his family in his will. Selling now he'd get taxed on the net revenue from the Clippers sale (1 bil - the sub 20 mil or whatever he paid) whereas if he passed it to his family in his will the original value would be changed to market price (1 bil - 1 bil) and so they'd only have to deal with estate taxes instead.

So it's in his best interest to get an injunction and keep this stretched out as long as possible to save a whole lot of money in taxes if he dies before it's settled. One theory I read was for him to divorce his wife who would then be en led to half of the Clippers. I don't know how they'd even deal with that especially given that she hasn't done anything wrong. At the very least it drags out the process.

I'm talking about transfer of ownership, which is allowed within the bylaws. The could arrange a deal where he files a transfer of ownership to a trust/kid/wife and the other owners promise not to strip him of ownership and approve the transfer. Under that scenario, there's no sale, it's a simply a transfer. He's out of the picture and his family retains the franchise.

EDIT: forgot to add, Silver can change or rescind the fine and/or ban. "lifetime" should be taken with a grain of salt.