Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 9YearLurker

What “contractual obligations” are you saying he violated?

He had the team ready to play, competitively, at the place and time they were designated to be at, at the time they were designated to be there.

You “believe” there is something about the “best interest of the game” involved? Do better next time.


47 posted on 04/30/2014 10:24:21 PM PDT by ReaganÜberAlles (Remember, you can't spell "progressive" without "SS".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: ReaganÃœberAlles

This is a contractual obligation:

“”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”, which is why an owner can be subject ot a fine if it is violated.

Then, as quoted in Ben’s article, under Article 13, “(a) Willfully violate any of the provisions of the Constitution and By-Laws, resolutions, or agreements of the Association.” What Sterling can argue is whether his statements were a willful violation, since he may not have expected that his statements would have ended up broadcast as they were. But that is the clause that the owners could use to try to force a sale.


53 posted on 04/30/2014 10:29:42 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson