The Clarks Being Dragged into the STL Rams Mess

[gblowfish]

Of course, fining an NFL owner $5,000 would be like you or me being fined thee fiddy....

Apologies if posted earlier...

Sam McDowell- KC Star
Wed, October 13, 2021

A St. Louis judge fined Chiefs chairman and CEO Clark Hunt and other NFL owners Wednesday and set a hearing for potential contempt of court for failing to disclose a fuller picture of their financial records as the judge previously requested.

That request came last month as part of discovery for a long-running lawsuit that alleges the NFL bypassed league relocation rules when the Rams left St. Louis.

Judge Christopher McGraugh levied Hunt a $5,000 fine — and also fined Dallas owner Jerry Jones $6,000, New England owner Robert Kraft $5,000 and New York Giants owner John Mara $8,000 — during a hearing Wednesday, in which he accused each of delaying in providing financial statements to gauge their net worth.

“It does seem to me that your clients ... are dragging their feet on this,” McGraugh told a lawyer for the owners, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, which attended the hearing and has been covering the lawsuit since its 2017 origin. “It seems like we’re in a three-card monte game.”

A month earlier, the judge warned the fines would arrive if fuller financial records did not. He made good on that promise Wednesday and set a hearing for Dec. 3 for why the four owners “should not be held in contempt of court,” according to his order. He also made them responsible for jointly paying $25,000 of attorney fees.

Hunt and the other three were part of a committee that helped explore the possibility of returning the Rams franchise to Los Angeles.

McGraugh also ordered Rams owner Stan Kroenke to fork over records, but the plaintiffs said he eventually obliged after initially trying to avoid disclosing them.

The lawsuit alleges that the the Rams’ move from St. Louis to Los Angeles cost the city millions of dollars in revenue.

As noted by the Post-Dispatch, Missouri’s state law permits the admission of civil defendants’ financial records in order to help juries assess potential punitive damages.

A jury trial is scheduled to begin Jan. 10.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/st-louis-...012935913.html

[burt]

The judicial system is seldom fair and always boggles my mind.

[Bowser]

Clark has that under the passenger seat of his 2022 Ferrari Purosangue

[wazu]

Kinda funny that Clark was part of the "exploratory" committee that looked into getting a regional competitor of his shipped off to California.

[Titty Meat]

Gracie has to tilt her head for this one

[Hammock Parties]

The Clarks can pay up after tripling ticket prices.

[Skyy God]

Originally Posted by Hammock Parties

The Clarks can pay up after tripling ticket prices.

Kroenke supposedly indemnified the NFL.

[Marcellus]

What does the owners of these teams net worth have to do with moving a team to another city as part of an NFL committee?

[jettio]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

What does the owners of these teams net worth have to do with moving a team to another city as part of an NFL committee?

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.

[DJ's left nut]

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.

That's the damndest thing about all this.

Kroenke didn't need to create this mess. He could've easily gotten approval to move without scorching the earth and engaging in potentially unfair dealing.

As you said - teams have moved before. It can be done on the up and up. I don't understand why Kroenke was compelled to poke the bear on his way out the door.

Bottom line is that Kroenke is kind of a known prick and cutthroat business partner. A pretty classic 'lay down with dogs and you'll get fleas' situation with St. Louis and Kroenke to begin with. And because he just can't help but be a prick (and presumably believes himself to rich to be punished for it), he got slapped.

There's at least a little karmic justice here.

[jettio]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

That's the damndest thing about all this.

Kroenke didn't need to create this mess. He could've easily gotten approval to move without scorching the earth and engaging in potentially unfair dealing.

As you said - teams have moved before. It can be done on the up and up. I don't understand why Kroenke was compelled to poke the bear on his way out the door.

Bottom line is that Kroenke is kind of a known prick and cutthroat business partner. A pretty classic 'lay down with dogs and you'll get fleas' situation with St. Louis and Kroenke to begin with. And because he just can't help but be a prick (and presumably believes himself to rich to be punished for it), he got slapped.

There's at least a little karmic justice here.

So did Kroenke have any money before marrying Sam Walton's daughter?

Pretty amazing how he has all these sports franchises and he got it all by saving up his allowance like a kid who wants a bicycle.

To be fair, after looking at his wikipedia bio, he married in 1974 and did a lot of real estate business in the 1980's and 1990's before he started buying teams, so seems to have made some money through his own work.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by jettio

So did Kroenke have any money before marrying Sam Walton's daughter?

Pretty amazing how he has all these sports franchises and he got it all by saving up his allowance like a kid who wants a bicycle.

To be fair, after looking at his wikipedia bio, he married in 1974 and did a lot of real estate business in the 1980's and 1990's before he started buying teams, so seems to have made some money through his own work.

Yeah - he's made a fair amount of money of his own by rat-****ing various business partners in land-deals over the last 40 years.

He's a truly awful human being. I think he's probably a good business man, but he's a piece of shit.

[ScareCrowe]

Originally Posted by jettio

So did Kroenke have any money before marrying Sam Walton's daughter?

Pretty amazing how he has all these sports franchises and he got it all by saving up his allowance like a kid who wants a bicycle.

To be fair, after looking at his wikipedia bio, he married in 1974 and did a lot of real estate business in the 1980's and 1990's before he started buying teams, so seems to have made some money through his own work.

That's a bit misleading. A ton of Kroenke's money was made by buying land around the spots where Wal Marts were going to be built & developing strip centers along those properties anchored to the Wal Mart. However my understanding was given that he was married into the Walton family he could get advance notice of where stores would go allowing him to get land that was pretty useless & sell or lease it at a premium once Wal Mart built there.

Granted it's not like he inherited a trust fund or anything but claiming he is "self made" isn't really right either. He married well & then parlayed that advantage into becoming one of the richest people in the world.

[DaFace]

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.

[jettio]

Originally Posted by DaFace

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.

I think you got a point that there may be some liability for some expenditures made to further efforts to keep the team in St. Louis, but those entities promised the Rams that they would always provide a venue that would objectively be considered a top 25% venue compared to all other NFL venues. And that failure to do so, would make the lease at the dome a year to year. IIRC, an independent arbitrator determined that the dome was not top 25% and that the lease became a year to year.

The NFL is not making most of its money harvesting organs for human transplants, there is nothing in the NFL's books that is a problem.

Everybody knows that they make a lot of money from media rights deals and some money from tickets and parking and licensing.

The NFL owners have to be transparent on certain matters with the NFLPA to honor the CBA when it comes to determining salary cap.

This idea that each individual owner should have all of their personal finances disclosed to these plaintiffs seems like litigation for nuisance sake.