Quote:
Originally Posted by jettio
I think it is questionable to name all the other individual teams and owners. It is a silly lawsuit in that regard.
I think Judge expects the Plaintiff's lawyers not to leak the information if turned over and thinks parties should produce the information in discovery if ordered.
Judge will probably split the trial to determine liability before allowing evidence on damages.
I think even a St. Louis jury will think it is wacky for parties that enticed the Rams to leave LA have much right to beef about the team going back to LA.
There is no real contract that says teams can not get approval to relocate.
I doubt the financials of 31 teams and their owners will ever be evidence at a trial if liability is determined before evidence on damages. But judges expect parties and their lawyers to follow orders and produce information and judges also expect the Plaintiffs' lawyers to guard the information.
|
As I understand it, the issue is that Kroenke (and the league) led the City to believe that the team would stay if they upgraded the stadium, so the City put all sorts of effort into figuring out what it would take to get it done. The reality was that Kroenke wanted to leave for LA all along, so he basically just cost the City time and money on a fool's errand. That might not sound like much, but it was years of work for a number of people, both government employees and others.
As for the contract, that's actually where the core issue is. The NFL's own rules state that there's a process for moving a team, and they skipped over parts of that process to get out of St. Louis. Therefore, St. Louis is trying to go after all of the money they've now lost from the team being relocated. And the bigger issue for the league is that any settlement would require information about the league's finances, and the league would almost rather pay the billions of dollars than let everyone know how much money teams really make.
At least that's how I understand it. Definitely not a lawyer.