Legal Issues in High School Athletics Publication Launched

July 9, 2009

Hackney Publications, publisher of Sports Litigation Alert and Legal Issues in Collegiate Athletics, has launched a new publication entitled “Legal Issues in High School Athletics“.

I am pleased to report that I will be joining Holt Hackney and Robert Romano as a contributing editor of this publication.  Click here to view the first issue of Legal Issues in High School Athletics.

Also, see the Press Release below:

Hackney Publications, publisher of Sports Litigation Alert and Legal Issues in Collegiate Athletics, announced today the debut of the newsletter Legal Issues in High School Athletics(LIHSA).

 LIHSA will include up to a dozen case summaries, articles and analysis discussing the inherent legal issues affecting high school athletics.  The newsletter will be published on a bimonthly basis and will feature the writing of long-time sports law journalist Holt Hackney, publisher of Sports Litigation Alert and Legal Issues in Collegiate Athletics.  Joining Hackney as contributing editors are Daniel B. Fitzgerald, a Connecticut attorney and publisher of the blog Connecticut Sports Law (http://ctsportslaw.com), and Robert J. Romano, also a Connecticut attorney and President of the Romano Sports Agency.

 To see a complimentary copy of the first issue, visit http://hackneypublications.com/lihsa/issues/2009/LIHSA-2009-July-August.php

“This is an emerging area of sports law, which is under served by the legal publishing industry,” said Hackney. “As editor of Sports Litigation Alert, I have noticed an innumerable number of coaches, athletic directors and school districts, finding themselves on the wrong end of a lawsuit.”

As attorneys practicing in the area of sports law, Fitzgerald and Romano believe the arrival of LIHSA is long overdue.

“There are a myriad of legal issues that arise in high school athletics on a daily basis.

LIHSA can increase awareness of these issues in the minds of high school coaches and athletic directors” said Fitzgerald.  “At the same time, LIHSA can be a valuable tool for superintendents, school board attorneys and law firms that practice in the area of sports law.”

Romano says that “LIHSA provides a unique resource, with a combination of current case summaries and practical legal articles relating to legal issues in high school athletics.”

Leave a Comment » | Blog News, High School Sports | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

FootieBusiness.com on Seattle Soccer Suit

July 8, 2009

money-soccer-209012FootieBusiness.com, published by Ben Berger, has published a couple of interesting posts concerning a lawsuit filed against MLS soccer player Nate Jacqua alleging sexual assault.

The first post deals with the fact that the plaintiff sued multiple parties, including the MLS and two MLS teams in connection with Jacqua’s alleged off-field actions:

The inclusion of multiple defendants smacks of overreaching by the plaintiff.  While this certainly adds deep pockets to the case (and can help settlement), the claims against the defendants other than Jacqua sound in “vicarious liability.”

The second post delves deeper into the issue of multiple defendants while also discussing jurisdictional questions:

One interesting procedural issue may arise because of the potential jurisdictional issues raised in the Complaint.  The plaintiff resides in Canada, MLS is located in New York, the Galaxy in California and Houston in Texas.  The defendants may seek to “remove” this case to Federal Court because of this diverse citizenship, thereby taking the matter from Oregon State Courts.  As a practical matter, this would likely have the impact of moving the case more efficiently, as Federal Courts tend to move faster than their state counterparts.  Perhaps more importantly, Federal Court judges (who have a lifetime appointment), are usually far more receptive to motions aimed dismissing the complaint prior to trial.  Such a tactic may especially benefit the teams and the league, because the of the difficulty in proving the vicarious liability portion of this case.

ben_berger1

Ben Berger

Ben continues to expand upon the great soccer posts he wrote for Connecticut Sports Law on his blog FootieBusiness.  If you are a soccer fan, you should check out this site.

Leave a Comment » | Major League Soccer | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

As Phoenix Coyotes Saga Continues, Hartford is Silent

July 7, 2009

By Dan Canavan

CoyotesWill the Bankruptcy Court Accept a Lower Offer to Keep the Coyotes in AZ?

A week ago Friday, Jerry Reinsdorf filed an offer to buy the Phoenix Coyotes for $148 million and keep the franchise in Glendale.  The Reinsdorf group appears to be the only serious bidder to have appeared in anticipation of the August 5th bankruptcy auction.

One of the most intriguing issues surrounding the Phoenix Coyotes bankruptcy is the possibility that the Bankruptcy Court would pass over Jim Balsillie’s bid in an attempt to find an owner willing to keep the franchise in Arizona.  At approximately, $64 million less than Balsillie’s offer to purchase the team and relocate to Canada, it remains to be scene if the Reinsdorf group will win the favor of Bankruptcy Court. 

The Coyotes’ creditors’ claims have been reported to top $127.8 million.  Since the Judge Baum did not rule in Balsilles’ favor on June 15th, the court has already indicated that it the highest bidder will not necessarily be the winner.  Judge Baum has the difficult task of weighing the competing interests of the club’s creditors.  Some creditors, such as the City of Glendale, will likely never recoup its losses if the team relocates out of the desert.  Glendale’s stands to lose millions more in future economic damages if the Coyotes skip town.  Other creditors, will fare much better if the team is sold to the highest bidder.  

Can the Coyotes Succeed in AZ?

To even suggest that the Coyotes can realistically stay in Arizona, the Reinsdorf group will be required to renegotiate its lease for Jobing.com Arena with the City of Glendale, as well as Aramark, the arena concession vendor, and Fox Sports Arizona, the Coyotes’ local cable broadcaster.   As part of the inevitable renegotiation of their cable contract, the Coyotes should seek to add games to their cable lineup.  Although entering its 13thyear as the “television home of the Phoenix Coyotes,” FS Arizona still only broadcast 40 games – or ½ of the Coyotes schedule – and only 20 games in hi-definition, which is substandard compared to other markets.  Although the NHL is also a creditor in the bankruptcy proceedings, look for a significant portion of the club’s debt to be forgiven in exchange for a promise by the winning bidder to stay in Phoenix.

Despite  the fact that the NHL has emphasized its comittment to professional hockey in Phoenix , there is considerable evidence that the NHL will not succeed in Arizona.  The NHL has tacitly admitted this fact, by agreeing to a two-tiered auction.  The general consensus is that the NHL has no interest in dealing with Balsillie as an owner.

Where is Hartford and the Bring Back the Whalers Movement?

whalers_puckIf not Arizona, what other locations are in play for a NHL team?  Despite some strong local sentiment, Hartford does not appear to be a player.  There is no indication, at least publically, that Hartford is on the NHL’s radar as a potential relocation/ expansion city or vice versa.  Although a Hartford contingent made a well-publicized trip to NHL headquarters in January 2009, they have been silent throughout the collapse of the Coyotes.  Perhaps the ill-timed arrest of Hartford Mayor Eddie Perez stifled the return of the Whalers, at least for now.

Other cities that might be in play include Kansas City, Las Vegas, Winnipeg, and Hamilton.

dan_canavan1Dan Canavan, Connecticut Sports Law’s resident hockey expert, is an attorney at Updike, Kelly & Spellacy in Hartford, Connecticut.  He has appeared as an on-air guest with regard to the NHL and the Phoenix Coyotes bankruptcy proceedings on CBC Radio’s World Report.  His analysis and commentary have also been published in the Sports Litigation Alert , a leading sports industry publication which is circulated throughout the United States.  Dan can be contacted at dcanavan@uks.com or 860-548-2672

Leave a Comment » | 1 | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

NFL Offseason: National Football Litigation

July 1, 2009

nfl-logoIt seems that there is no NFL offseason anymore.  With the NFL Draft, rookie camps, minicamps, OTAs, trade demands and other events, the NFL is always in the news.  Thanks to sites such as the National Football Post and Pro Football Talk, new NFL coverage and analysis is constantly available.

In recent weeks, the NFL has been in the news in connection with two lawsuits. 

American Needle v. NFL

Gabe Feldman of the Sports Law Blog has posted an excellent analysis of this antitrust case, in which the NFL seeks to be classified as a “single entity” (rather than 32 individual franchises) to avoid antitrust suits:

An expansion of the Seventh Circuit’s holding would be a huge win for professional sports leagues. Depending on the scope of the Supreme Court’s decision, leagues could be free to make decisions regarding the location and ownership of teams, contraction of franchises, television restrictions, intellectual property licensing, etc., without fear of attack under Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Taken to its most unlikely extreme, the Supreme Court could extend the single entity protection to cover all decisions made by a league, including salary caps, player drafts, free agency rules, and other player restraints.

Jurevicius v. Cleveland Browns

joe-jurevicius-and-braylon(1)As reported by the AP, former Browns receiver Joe Jurevicius has sued the team and the Cleveland Clinic in connection with a staph infection in his knee.  Jurevicius was unable to play last year and his Compliant indicates that his career may be over.

This story is interesting in light of the ongoing problems that the Browns have experienced with staph infections, including the very public situation with Kellen Winslow Jr. last year.  This case presents a great example of a sports law case that is really a negligence/malpractice case involving a sports team and athlete. 

Although the body of law is the same for Jurevicius as its is for a construction worker suing a former employee and medical clinic, the infusion of sports likley makes the handling of the case very different.  For example, the Browns are defending the lawsuit but also managing public relations, and the team’s image with respect to its current players and potential free agents.  Jurevicius, a player on the back end of his career, has to prosecute his claim but also consider whether suing an NFL team will limit his chances to play for another team should his knee recover.  If the case goes to a jury trial, the Browns may have a difficult time finding impartial jurors without well-formed opinions about this case.

Also, one note about the reporting of lawsuits: this article states that “[t]he lawsuit asked for damages totaling more than $25,000, plus unspecified punitive damages, attorney and expert fees and related costs.”  Typically, a complaint does not set forth the damages sought by the plaintiff with any degree of accuracy.  The Complaint either sets forth a claim that the damages exceed a certain amount ($15,000 in Connecticut) to meet a statutory requirement to bring a claim in that particular court; or the plaintiff essentially sets forth his demand, a number that will be reduced or verified during the discovery process or settlement negotiations.

In the Jurevicius case, it appears that the $25,000 figure was included in the Complaint to meet a prescribed requirement.  Jurevicius likely seeks a much greater figure from the Browns and the Cleveland Clinic.

1 Comment | National Football League, Sports Litigation | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

NBA Draft Approaches, One and Done Discussion Continues

June 25, 2009

NBA

With the NBA Draft being held tonight, the issue of the “one and-done” college basketball player is once again in focus.  Marc Isenberg, publisher of the blog Money Players, has written frequently written on this topic.  Here’s an excerpt from his latest post:

On one hand, it is absurd to get completely bent out of shape over a just a few players. On the other, “one and done” brings to light many of college basketball’s dirty secrets. To namejust a few: unscrupulous agents, shady coaches, academic shananigans, AAU “non-profits” funded by agents, financial advisers and, oh yes, boosters (Say it ain’t so!).Many would love to see the NBA create a system similar to MLB, where players can go pro right out of high school, but if they choose college, they are not eligible NBA draft for three years. But, college basketball is no longer the only route to the NBA, so further restrictions could drive more American players overseas.

Click here to read Isenberg’s post in its entirety.  For my take on the one and done trend, see the following articles, previously posted on Connecticut Sports Law:

One and Done: The Effect of the Business Decision on NCAA Basketball

One and Done: O.J. Mayo and Amateurism in NCAA Basketball

Also, see ESPN’s Outside the Lines piece on the one and done.

2 Comments | NCAA, National Basketball Association | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

Phoenix Coyotes Auction to Favor Local Bidders

June 23, 2009

coyotes

By Dan Canavan

The NHL franchise currently known as the Phoenix Coyotes will be put up for auction by the Bankruptcy Court.  On Monday, Judge Redfield T. Baum ruled that the team would be auctioned, and set a two-tiered schedule for the sale of the Club, designed to favor a local ownership group willing to keep the team in Phoenix.  The auction will proceed as follows:

  1. Local bidders, who would agree to keep the team in Phoenix, will have an opportunity to submit offers by August 5th.  For now Jim Balsillie will remain on the bench.  He has demonstrated no interest in keeping the team in Phoenix, and accordingly has been effectively barred from participating in the first segment of the auction. 
  2. Should the auction fail to attract an acceptable offer from a local ownership group, other potential suitors will be allowed to place bids on the team prior by September 10th.   The intent of the second auction would be to find an ownership group to relocate the team for the 2010-11 season.

The two-tiered approach allows the NHL to scour the earth for a local ownership group before reaching the messy issue of relocation.  After the hearing, NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly reemphasized the NHL’s desire to keep the Coyotes in the desert:

We’re pleased that the judge adopted the two-tiered approach to the auction, and we’re confident – we’ve said all along we’re confident – there’s a viable offer that will make this team viable in Glendale, and now we’ll let that process play out.

In briefs filed with the court on Monday, the NHL promised to report to the Bankruptcy Court “whether or not there is a local buyer for the Coyotes” and if not, “the NHL can undertake an orderly sale of the club to a bidder that would relocate the club for the 2010-11 season.” Multiple media outlets are reporting that the NHL will announce that Jerry Reinsdorf’s group will place an offer before the Court by Friday to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix.  Reinsdorf currently owns MLB’s Chicago White Sox as well as the NBA’s Chicago Bulls.  Attorney Anthony Clark, representing the NHL in these proceedings, reported that “a term sheet with details of Reinsdorf’s offer, which would keep the team in Glendale, should be available by the end of the week.”

dan_canavan1Dan Canavan, Connecticut Sports Law’s resident hockey expert, is an attorney at Updike, Kelly & Spellacy in Hartford, Connecticut.  He has appeared as an on-air guest with regard to the NHL and the Phoenix Coyotes bankruptcy proceedings on CBC Radio’s World Report.  His analysis and commentary have also been published in the Sports Litigation Alert Newsletter, which is circulated throughout the United States.  Dan can be contacted at dcanavan@uks.com or 860-548-2672

Leave a Comment » | Hartford Whalers, National Hockey League, Professional Sports in Hartford | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

Correction: No Secret Clause for Rutgers, Schiano

June 20, 2009

In my previous post entitled “Revisiting the UConn-Notre Dame Series” I referred to an earlier post that I had written about coaching contracts, and cited reports by the Star-Ledger that Rutgers coach Greg Schiano had a secret clause in his contract allowing him to leave the university should the stadium renovation not be completed on time. 

Thanks to avoid Rutgers fans Scott and Jim, among others, I have been informed that I was mistaken – there was not a secret clause in Schiano’s contract.   Please see the following articles for clarification:

Despite Previous Denials Rutgers Stadium Project to Be Scaled Down

It was reported last week by the Star-Ledger of Newark that Schiano would not have to pay a $500,000 buyout of his contract if the stadium is not completed on time. The story was picked up on the home pages of ESPN and Sports Illustrated Web sites. The Fox Sports site gave it the headline: “Secret deal could let Schiano leave Rutgers.”

But there was no deal — secret or otherwise — according to Mulcahy and a source close to Schiano familiar with the details of the contract.

Click on the above link for the entire story.

Mulcahy Defends His Record as Rutgers AD; Insists He Did Nothing Wrong

In a later interview with sports radio station WFAN, Mulcahy criticized The Star-Ledger’s coverage of the athletic department’s finances.

“They’ve been on a vendetta,” he said of the newspaper. “They use adjectives — there’s nothing I can do about it. They have the right to print stuff. I just disagree.”

He added: “They wouldn’t print some of the answers I gave them, so I gave up talking to them.”

Click on the above link for the entire story.

Thanks again to all who provided comments and pointed out my mistake.  In addition, I will be deleting any references to Rutgers in my post which appears to have distracted from the intended subjects, UConn and Notre Dame.

2 Comments | Colleges and Universities, Connecticut Local News, UConn Sports | Tagged: , | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

Revisiting the UConn-Notre Dame Football Series

June 19, 2009

TouchdownJesusIt was exactly 15 months ago today that I first wrote about the football series between UConn and Notre Dame.  The title of the article was “How Far Should UConn Go to Play in the House that Rockne Built?”  And that very same issue persists today – with no games to be played in Connecticut, is UConn giving up too much to play the Fighting Irish?

In the aftermath of April’s NFL Draft, in which 4 UConn players were chosen in the first 2 rounds, there is some sentiment that UConn football has arrived.  UConn doesn’t need Notre Dame for recruiting, exposure or anything else.  If Rutgers tells Notre Dame that it won’t play “home games” in the Meadowlands, so should UConn.   Notre Dame football is simply trading on its mystique, not performance, so why would UConn bend over backwards to accommodate the Fighting Irish?

This sentiment is simply mistaken.  Although I’d love to see Notre Dame play at the Rent, the series makes perfect sense for UConn.  Although the perception may be that UConn is weak for accommodating Notre Dame’s demands, the perception is irrelevant.  What’s important is the reality.  The reality is that UConn will receive unmatched exposure and benefits from the series.  Here are 2 reasons that UConn needs to sign the Notre Dame deal:

Unbeatable Mystique, Beatable Football Team

It has been suggested that UConn would be better off playing Top 25 teams than a fading Notre Dame team.  I disagree.  UConn gains little by playing Top 25 teams and getting trounced.  But Notre Dame carries the mystique of a Top 25 team, an unmatched TV deal with NBC, and best of all – is completely beatable.  I’ll take a UConn win on national TV to boost recruiting rather than having USC crush the Huskies.

Also, the reality is that Notre Dame  from a football standpoint is on par with, or an upgrade over, UConn’s 2008 non-conference opponents:  Hofstra, Temple, Virginia, Baylor and North Carolina.   From a recruiting and exposure perspective these teams are no match for Notre Dame.

Playing Under the Golden Dome

NotreDamehelmetNotre Dame’s mystique is bigger than its recent on-field success.  But why is that so important?  The fact that we’re talking about UConn football right now, proves that the Notre Dame series will advance the UConn football program.  In fact, I’ve never heard so much talk about UConn football in an off-season.  The first topic of conversation when Huskies’ football comes up is inevitably - are you going to South Bend in November?

Like it or not, Notre Dame is viewed differently by the public and possesses unique leverage in scheduling opponents.  When asked to describe the mystique of Notre Dame, Lou Holtz once replied:

If you were there, no explanation is necessary.  If you weren’t, no explanation is satisfactory.

12 Comments | Colleges and Universities, Connecticut Local News, NFL Draft, Notre Dame, UConn Sports | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

NHL Wins the Battle in the Desert, But Will it Win the War?

June 17, 2009

Coyotes1By Dan Canavan

Late on Monday, Bankruptcy Judge Redfield T. Baum ruled that Jim Balsillie cannot force the NHL to move the Coyotes to Canada.  The Coyotes’ saga, however, is far from over.

Judge Baum’s ruling does not preclude the ultimate transfer of the team to Balsillie or any other party that may seek to relocate the team. Balsillie has already made it known that he isn’t going away.  But the ruling effectively lets the NHL make ownership and relocation decisions regarding the Coyotes on its own terms.  For the immediate future, Coyotes Hockey, LLC will remain in bankruptcy, which will allow the franchise to reorganize.

Considering Judge Baum’s factual findings regarding the Coyotes’ inability to remain profitable over the last 10 years, all interested parties have their work cut out for them.  The Coyotes’ current lease with the City of Glendale has effectively precluded the franchise from any hope of turning a profit.  Any new ownership group should also consider renegotiating Wayne Gretzky’s exorbitant coaching contract.  There are likely countless other debts that the franchise will now be able to renegotiate with the help of the bankruptcy trustee.  This is all before the Coyotes address their on-ice issues.

If we believe the NHL, a full makeover of the franchise will allow the Coyotes to be profitable in Phoenix.  Remaining in bankruptcy will also allow the NHL to effectuate an ownership change in a manner of its choosing.  If the Coyotes remain in the desert, look for the new ownership group to commit to a significantly lower price tag than Balsillie’s $212.5 million offer.  If no new ownership group emerges, the team could be put up for auction.  Theoretically, the bankruptcy trustee could hold an asset sale pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 363, and sell the franchise to the highest bidder willing to remain in Glendale.

As New York Times blogger Stu Hackel posted this morning,

yesterday’s ruling, though it sustained the status quo, has not fixed this situation.… It’s still a mess.

The NHL Players Association wants out of Phoenix.  The NHL spent the last six weeks engaged in litigation instead of celebrating a competitive and exciting Stanley Cup tournament.  The sports world has again been reminded that only four major league professional sports teams have filed for bankruptcy – all of which have been NHL teams.  Phoenix isn’t the only NHL current franchise on the ropes, and there is widespread concern regarding the health of the league.  The Commissioner will likely be able to patch something together to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix for the short run, and the NHL will have successfully protected its “league opportunity” in Southern Ontario.  But Balsillie, Canadian hockey fans and other under appreciated hockey markets, will be waiting for the next franchise to falter.

dan_canavan1Dan Canavan, Connecticut Sports Law’s resident hockey expert, is an attorney at Updike, Kelly & Spellacy in Hartford, Connecticut and fan of the former Hartford Whalers.  He has appeared as a guest with regard to the NHL and the Phoenix Coyotes bankruptcy proceedings on CBC Radio’s World Report.  Dan can be contacted at dcanavan@uks.com or 860-548-2672

2 Comments | Hartford Whalers, National Hockey League, Sports Litigation | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

Will Plaxico Burress Play Football in 2009?

June 16, 2009

Michael McCann of SI.com and Sports Law Blog has an interesting piece on Plaxico Burress, and whether Commissioner Roger Goodell will allow Burress to play football this season - should a team be interested in signing him.  McCann also mentions that the UFL may be a destination for Burress.  Here’s an excerpt from the article:

Plaxico Burress’ representatives believe that Monday’s adjournment of their client’s trial until Sept. 23 clears the way for the 31-year-old free agent to sign with an NFL team. They are particularly optimistic that teams will be interested because the trial may be adjourned again until after the 2009 season.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell may have other ideas. Under the league’s personnel conduct policy, Goodell can sanction any player whose conduct is “detrimental” to the league, with “detrimental” determined by the commissioner.

nyg_plaxico_burress_011In addition, McCann discusses the political factors that might play into Goodell’s decision, as New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has publically declared that Burress should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  Click here to read McCann’s article in its entirety.

Leave a Comment » | National Football League | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Dan Fitzgerald

« Previous Entries