Close

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 251 to 275 of 319
  1. #251
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    If I was the attorney this is exact same argument I would make:

    Click here to enlarge
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  2. #252
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    This is freaking gold right here. Maybe I should have been an attorney? Just being able to use '$#@!ing $#@!' in a legal document like this while keeping a straight face is priceless. I feel like I could do even better:

    Click here to enlarge
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  3. #253
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    115
    Rep Points
    262.8
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Yes Reputation No
    Appears Shelly Sterling controls the team and is going to sell.

    Smart woman. Let's see what she gets.Click here to enlarge

  4. #254
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    1,088
    Rep Points
    918.4
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    i just read that whole document, wow thats $#@!ed up they locked him out of his own office lol
    '08 535xi - fbo

  5. #255
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Points
    15.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Sterling is done. It seems he signed an agreement with his wife, Shelly to let her sell the team and she's doing so. Sterling's argument is the league can't force him to sell because he's a racist?!? Lol. He's hurting the league with his conduct. Once his private convo goes public it doesn't matter how it got there he's damaged the brand and his partners are forcing him to sell. He signed an agreement that states if 75% of the owners want him out then he's out. All this other stuff about the constitution is wrong. This isn't constitutional law it's contract law. I'm laughing to myself reading this document because he has no argument at all. He throwing stuff against the wall and is hoping it sticks.

  6. #256
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    Sterling is done. It seems he signed an agreement with his wife, Shelly to let her sell the team and she's doing so. Sterling's argument is the league can't force him to sell because he's a racist?!? Lol. He's hurting the league with his conduct. Once his private convo goes public it doesn't matter how it got there he's damaged the brand and his partners are forcing him to sell. He signed an agreement that states if 75% of the owners want him out then he's out. All this other stuff about the constitution is wrong. This isn't constitutional law it's contract law. I'm laughing to myself reading this document because he has no argument at all. He throwing stuff against the wall and is hoping it sticks.
    No his lawyers argument is sound. He can't willingly damage a brand by someone illegally releasing an illegally recorded conversation. Furthermore, you'll notice the argument they make about the 'damaging the brand' provision not being a catch-all provision for anything the commissioner wants. It's sound legal reasoning not throwing random stuff against a wall.

    He has an excellent argument and the law should be on his side.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  7. #257
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Points
    15.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    No his lawyers argument is sound. He can't willingly damage a brand by someone illegally releasing an illegally recorded conversation. Furthermore, you'll notice the argument they make about the 'damaging the brand' provision not being a catch-all provision for anything the commissioner wants. It's sound legal reasoning not throwing random stuff against a wall.

    He has an excellent argument and the law should be on his side.
    No one purposely tries to damage their brand. It doesn't matter how the info got out there. Plus, his interview with Anderson Cooper sealed his fate when he basically agreed with everything the tape said! His partners vote next week or so on whether to kick him out. Once they do that it's over. Sterling is trying to keep the owners from voting against him by saying he'll fight it.

  8. #258
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    No one purposely tries to damage their brand. It doesn't matter how the info got out there. Plus, his interview with Anderson Cooper sealed his fate when he basically agreed with everything the tape said! His partners vote next week or so on whether to kick him out. Once they do that it's over. Sterling is trying to keep the owners from voting against him by saying he'll fight it.
    It doesn't matter whether it was purposely as due to the recording being a violation of his constitutional rights the proceedings should be terminated on those grounds alone. It DOES matter how the recording got out there. There's this thing called the law you obviously are not familiar with.

    An interview expressing opinions sealed his fate? Seriously? You disagree with his opinions and that means you can seize property? You aren't a lawyer. You never would be a lawyer with that kind of thinking.

    What Sterling is doing is taking a stand against the NBA which caved into pressure with its actions against him and totally ignored the law.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  9. #259
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    It doesn't matter how the info got out there.
    You simply don't know what you're talking about:

    Click here to enlarge

    Sterling has not failed to commit to any contractual obligation. All players, coaches, and employees were paid, all revenue sharing took place, etc.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  10. #260
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Points
    15.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    First of all, the NBA is not a court of law; it's a private association which approves of each buyer. You can't sell to anyone without league approval. We are not talking about a house or car he owns. Sterling is part of a league. If you're negatively effecting the "brand" your partners won't want to do business with you and by violating NBA by-laws, "adversely affected the league" with his comments led to loss of revenue and damaged the brand; this gives the NBA the right to terminate his franchise license. After they vote to terminate, the league will force him to sell on the open market. (Forbes magazine estimates the team value is a billion dollars.) So his property isn't being taken from him illegally. It's in the contract he signed.


    Secondly, If you want to argue violation of privacy you need to talk to his mistress. The NBA has nothing to do with that. Sterling needs to take personal responsibility for what he said and sell the team and move on. Fighting now is just more of a face saving gesture. Besides, he already authorized his wife to sell the team so it doesn't matter. She's selling it.

  11. #261
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    First of all, the NBA is not a court of law; it's a private association which approves of each buyer.
    First of all don't preach to me about law as I have studied far more than you and secondly just because an organization is private does not mean it can violate CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHTS.

    Try forming a private organization that hunts humans for sport and let me know how that goes for you.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    If you're negatively effecting the "brand" your partners won't want to do business with you and by violating NBA by-laws,
    Once again, you did not read the fine print. The provision the NBA is using is regarding CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS. All of which have been met by Sterling as his lawyers correctly state.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    this gives the NBA the right to terminate his franchise license.
    No it does not which is exactly what the lawyers argue because it is not a catch all provision anyone can interpret any which way they want to. There is specific wording as to what this entails. It does not say 'boo hoo if someone's feelings get hurt we do what we want' unless I'm missing that?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    After they vote to terminate, the league will force him to sell on the open market. (Forbes magazine estimates the team value is a billion dollars.) So his property isn't being taken from him illegally. It's in the contract he signed.
    They can vote but that doesn't mean Sterling can not fight in court whether they even have the grounds to proceed with termination based on an illegal recording. As the recording is illegal, this supersedes its use as it is not admissible as evidence.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    Secondly, If you want to argue violation of privacy you need to talk to his mistress. The NBA has nothing to do with that. Sterling needs to take personal responsibility for what he said and sell the team and move on. Fighting now is just more of a face saving gesture. Besides, he already authorized his wife to sell the team so it doesn't matter. She's selling it.
    He did take personal responsibility but there is nothing in law that says you can take someone's property because they do not think the way you want them to.

    His lawyers are spot on.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  12. #262
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Points
    15.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    First of all don't preach to me about law as I have studied far more than you and secondly just because an organization is private does not mean it can violate CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHTS.

    Try forming a private organization that hunts humans for sport and let me know how that goes for you.
    The NBA didn't violate his rights at all. His views are public knowledge and he's a liability to their ability to maximize profits. That's why they want him out. You can't argue violation of privacy when the info is known to the public. Just because you have a private conversation with someone at the time doesn't mean it will always stay that way. Plenty of people have gotten in trouble by saying something when they thought they were in private and were overheard. And there is even some doubt that he didn't know he was being recorded. His mistress said they would record conversations all the time.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Originally Posted by hnic357
    If you're negatively effecting the "brand" your partners won't want to do business with you and by violating NBA by-laws,
    Once again, you did not read the fine print. The provision the NBA is using is regarding CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS. All of which have been met by Sterling as his lawyers correctly state.
    That's what Sterling's lawyer says. Good luck trying to make that argument stick. He doesn't site any cases where privacy rights was used to reverse a private association's decision.


    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Originally Posted by hnic357
    this gives the NBA the right to terminate his franchise license.
    No it does not which is exactly what the lawyers argue because it is not a catch all provision anyone can interpret any which way they want to. There is specific wording as to what this entails. It does not say 'boo hoo if someone's feelings get hurt we do what we want' unless I'm missing that?
    Look again. The provision doesn't say it has to be about paying contracts. That's your interpretation.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Originally Posted by hnic357
    After they vote to terminate, the league will force him to sell on the open market. (Forbes magazine estimates the team value is a billion dollars.) So his property isn't being taken from him illegally. It's in the contract he signed.
    They can vote but that doesn't mean Sterling can not fight in court whether they even have the grounds to proceed with termination based on an illegal recording. As the recording is illegal, this supersedes its use as it is not admissible as evidence.
    According to the NBA constitution the body is governed by NY state law which does allow 1-way taped conversations. Even though the tape was made in Cali the NBA could claim it doesn't matter because of this. It's irrelevant anyway because we're not even sure he didn't approve of being recorded.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Originally Posted by hnic357
    Secondly, If you want to argue violation of privacy you need to talk to his mistress. The NBA has nothing to do with that. Sterling needs to take personal responsibility for what he said and sell the team and move on. Fighting now is just more of a face saving gesture. Besides, he already authorized his wife to sell the team so it doesn't matter. She's selling it.
    He did take personal responsibility but there is nothing in law that says you can take someone's property because they do not think the way you want them to.

    His lawyers are spot on.
    His thoughts are not the issue. He's costing them money and creating bad publicity for the league. Even the privacy issues is dead now since he went on Anderson Cooper's show and ripped into Magic and basically admitted he meant all those things he said on the tape.

  13. #263
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    2,570
    Rep Points
    1,864.9
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    he went on Anderson Cooper's show and ripped into Magic and basically admitted he meant all those things he said on the tape.
    It is nice someone finally said what we all knew/thought publicly about Magic.
    E92 Bren Tune / E90 PTF Tune / E70 Twin Turbo Diesel JBD

    Got Boost?

    Click here to enlarge

  14. #264
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    The NBA didn't violate his rights at all.
    Please read this over until you understand it:

    Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    His views are public knowledge and he's a liability to their ability to maximize profits.
    If I was Sterling's attorneys I would argue the fact he got a $1.8 billion offer from Balmer that he just increased the value of every owner's team and just made people money on that alone. So he's a liability by just increasing everyone's value by millions?

    Secondly, the provision is not about someone's opinions. Once again I have to repeat it is about contractual obligations not a catch all provision regarding if you like his opinions. What you think about what he said is legally irrelevant as he has not violated a single contractual obligation with any NBA personnel.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    ou can't argue violation of privacy when the info is known to the public.
    Yes you can as his lawyers just did, see above. Do you or I know more than they do? So you're saying his lawyers just pulled California law out of their rear ends when they directly cite the penal code? Huh?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    Just because you have a private conversation with someone at the time doesn't mean it will always stay that way.
    Um there's thing called expectation to privacy which is why you can be recorded when you are out in public as you do not have an expectation to privacy in public. This is something the supreme court already ruled on. I just don't think you know the law.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    Plenty of people have gotten in trouble by saying something when they thought they were in private and were overheard.
    Please cite precedents where someone was legally forced to cede property for expressing an opinion.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    His mistress said they would record conversations all the time.
    For what possible purpose? To sell to TMZ?

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    That's what Sterling's lawyer says. Good luck trying to make that argument stick. He doesn't site any cases where privacy rights was used to reverse a private association's decision.
    You're not making any sense here. He has not violated any contractual obligations and California law regarding private conversations supercedes what you may think of what he said anyway.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    Look again. The provision doesn't say it has to be about paying contracts. That's your interpretation.
    Right here in plain English, 'Fail or refuse to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association.' What contractual obligation has he refused to fulfill? I don't see anything anywhere that says an owner is contractually obligated to have politically correct private conversations. Maybe because no private organization can violate the First Amendment?

    Click here to enlarge

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    According to the NBA constitution the body is governed by NY state law which does allow 1-way taped conversations.
    See if you studied law you would know that the state law where the conversation takes place is what matters and other states have to recognize that state's laws in such instances.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    His thoughts are not the issue. He's costing them money and creating bad publicity for the league.
    $1.8 billion dollar offer on the table. He just made everyone money before he even sold the franchise.

    I rest my case.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  15. #265
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Torgus Click here to enlarge
    It is nice someone finally said what we all knew/thought publicly about Magic.
    Say mean things about Magic and you have to give up your property? LOL who cares? Magic did sleep with everything that moves.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  16. #266
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    6500ft ASL
    Posts
    1,118
    Rep Points
    2,239.5
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    23


    Yes Reputation No
    $2B for a $12M investment?

    Click here to enlarge

    -Rich

  17. #267
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    Just heard the $2 billion dollars is binding.

    Sterling just made every owner money, gave his kids $2 billion, and Magic gets nothing.

    Now is he going to go after the whore for releasing the illegal recording?
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  18. #268
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Points
    15.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Please read this over until you understand it:

    http://www.ImportBoost.com/images/im.../3sucQC4-1.png



    His lawyers just did, see above. Do you or I know more than they do? So you're saying his lawyers just pulled California law out of their rear ends when they directly cite the penal code? Huh?



    Um there's thing called expectation to privacy which is why you can be recorded when you are out in public as you do not have an expectation to privacy in public. This is something the supreme court already ruled on. I just don't think you know the law.



    Please cite precedents where someone was legally forced to cede property for expressing an opinion.



    For what possible purpose? To sell to TMZ?



    You're not making any sense here. He has not violated any contractual obligations and California law regarding private conversations supercedes what you may think of what he said anyway.



    Right here in plain English, 'Fail or refuse to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association.' What contractual obligation has he refused to fulfill? I don't see anything anywhere that says an owner is contractually obligated to have politically correct private conversations. Maybe because no private organization can violate the First Amendment?

    http://www.bimmerboost.com/images/im.../rMFq71X-1.png



    See if you studied law you would know that the state law where the conversation takes place is what matters and other states have to recognize that state's laws in such instances.



    $1.8 billion dollar offer on the table. He just made everyone money before he even sold the franchise.

    I rest my case.
    All these things you've sited are from Sterling's attorney. He's word isn't the law. The fact is the team is being sold and then Sterling can pretend he still has a team while suing the league for breach of contract. He'll lose because he already agreed to the league rules and courts tend not to over throw binding arbitration agreements.

  19. #269
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    All these things you've sited are from Sterling's attorney. He's word isn't the law.
    No kidding but clearly he has a case. His lawyers aren't just pulling penal codes from thin air. They actually are citing LAWS. They aren't just saying 'oh we don't like what Adam Silver said' as their entire case.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    He'll lose because he already agreed to the league rules and courts tend not to over throw binding arbitration agreements
    As Sterling's attorneys argue he hasn't violated any league rules or laws. I think his lawyers make a better case than you do.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  20. #270
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Points
    15.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    No kidding but clearly he has a case. His lawyers aren't just pulling penal codes from thin air. They actually are citing LAWS. They aren't just saying 'oh we don't like what Adam Silver said' as their entire case.
    no $#@! they are citing laws. Lawyers make arguments all the time that are irrelevant or thrown out of court. Sterling's lawyer is doing what he's paid to do. Most lawyers familiar with contract law says he has no case.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    As Sterling's attorneys argue he hasn't violated any league rules or laws. I think his lawyers make a better case than you do.
    Yeah, Sterling's lawyer is going to say that. That's why I go back to the by-laws which gives the league wide authority to kick people out by terminating their franchise rights.

  21. #271
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    no $#@! they are citing laws. Lawyers make arguments all the time that are irrelevant or thrown out of court. Sterling's lawyer is doing what he's paid to do. Most lawyers familiar with contract law says he has no case.
    Their arguments are completely relevant and you have offered absolutely no analysis of them. You're point is an Anderson Cooper interview as if it that has any relevancy to property or privacy rights that are guaranteed.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    Yeah, Sterling's lawyer is going to say that. That's why I go back to the by-laws which gives the league wide authority to kick people out by terminating their franchise rights.
    You're having trouble reading the by-laws as there is no by-law that states we can take your team for whatever reason we invent. Sterling is actually standing on strong legal ground. You're standing on nothing.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  22. #272
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Points
    15.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Their arguments are completely relevant and you have offered absolutely no analysis of them. You're point is an Anderson Cooper interview as if it that has any relevancy to property or privacy rights that are guaranteed.
    How are they relevant? Their are several agreements owners sign including the joint venture agreement where owners assent to league authority. Sterling's privacy argument is not based on law, it's based on trying to sway the owners.


    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    You're having trouble reading the by-laws as there is no by-law that states we can take your team for whatever reason we invent. Sterling is actually standing on strong legal ground. You're standing on nothing.
    Let's put it this way, if Sterling thinks he has a good case he can get a judge to halt the sale with an injunction against the NBA. It won't happen because what you're claiming is not at issue. Sterling "case" is based on trying to sway the owners from voting him out. He's trying to scare the other owners into thinking what is happening to Sterling can happen to me.

  23. #273
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    How are they relevant? Their are several agreements owners sign including the joint venture agreement where owners assent to league authority. Sterling's privacy argument is not based on law, it's based on trying to sway the owners.
    You are not even coherent here with major usage errors. The owners do not cede authority to the league they agree they will maintain their contractual obligations. What contracts has Sterling violated? He has paid all of his players and employees. The provision has absolutely nothing to do with private conversations or opinions. Sterling's lawyers are completely correct and the law is on their side.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
    Let's put it this way, if Sterling thinks he has a good case he can get a judge to halt the sale with an injunction against the NBA. It won't happen because what you're claiming is not at issue. Sterling "case" is based on trying to sway the owners from voting him out. He's trying to scare the other owners into thinking what is happening to Sterling can happen to me.
    He does have a good case. He could tie this up in court for years. Frankly, if it was me and a vote took place ousting me I'd argue collusion going after the owners as well as the league. Let's see how many of them want to risk their assets then, eh? But I'm young and wouldn't mind the fight. Sterling is in his 80's and may just be content to take his $2 billion.

    Regardless, as the $2 billion dollar offer shows Sterling can now claim he just elevated the value of every NBA franchise. It is almost four times the value of the last sale at $550 million.

    What happens to Sterling should scare the other owners because law works on precedent. If you start taking property away for private comments recorded illegally it is a hell of a slippery slope as Mark Cuban understood and stated. What Sterling said is basically irrelevant.
    Chrome Space Bar Issue: http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...338#post738338


    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  24. #274
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Points
    15.2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    You are not even coherent here with major usage errors. The owners do not cede authority to the league they agree they will maintain their contractual obligations. What contracts has Sterling violated? He has paid all of his players and employees. The provision has absolutely nothing to do with private conversations or opinions. Sterling's lawyers are completely correct and the law is on their side.
    "failure to fulfill contract obligations" when he embarrassed the NBA which the commissioner called, "conduct detrimental to the league." That clear enough? The owners sign several agreements not just the NBA by-laws. Franchise agreements also contain these conduct clauses.


    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    He does have a good case. He could tie this up in court for years. Frankly, if it was me and a vote took place ousting me I'd argue collusion going after the owners as well as the league. Let's see how many of them want to risk their assets then, eh? But I'm young and wouldn't mind the fight. Sterling is in his 80's and may just be content to take his $2 billion.
    He can't tie up the sale unless he gets an injunction and that is highly unlikely. He might try to embarrass the other owners with putting some dirty laundry out there but they could do the same to him.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Regardless, as the $2 billion dollar offer shows Sterling can now claim he just elevated the value of every NBA franchise. It is almost four times the value of the last sale at $550 million.
    How can he claim it? He owns the franchise in LA, the 2nd biggest market in the country. Milwaukee has 600k people in it. 900k in all of Milwaukee county. The city of Los Angeles by itself is over 3 million. Of course the Clippers are worth more. They're in LA and he happens to own them; Sterling didn't do a damn thing to make them worth 2 billion.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    What happens to Sterling should scare the other owners because law works on precedent. If you start taking property away for private comments recorded illegally it is a hell of a slippery slope as Mark Cuban understood and stated. What Sterling said is basically irrelevant.
    We don't know if the call was illegal since his mistress said Sterling would tape his own conversations to remember things he said. Who you gonna believe? Neither one of them are reputable sources or honorable people.

  25. #275
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    1,088
    Rep Points
    918.4
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Now is he going to go after the whore for releasing the illegal recording?
    Click here to enlarge
    yeah
    '08 535xi - fbo

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •