CougarCorner

The NBA is touting this "ruling" as if it's a major coup for them and they've avoided a headache. The headache has just begun.

This adds ammo to the suit Sterling is going to file against the NBA--if the NBA wants to argue he is incapacitated, Sterling's army of litigators is going to say "Great!"--so you fined a mentally incapacitated person $2MM and banned him from the league? REAL progressive there NBA." That's what we call discrimination against the mentally ill/incapacitated.

Add to that the fact that Sterling's objection to the NBA's proposed vote for Tuesday includes allegations of homophobic slurs from another owner, and it's clear that Sterling has a clear strategy for his suit--scorched earth. Each and every owner, part-owner, executive, etc. in the NBA is going to find themselves getting deposed in a Paula Deen-like deposition where they are asked "Have you ever in your life used the n-word?" and their pasts are going to get combed for any hint of a racist comment, joke, or leaning, not to mention calling people "retard" (because now discrimination against the mentally incapacitated is fair game), or any homophobic comments.

Way to go Mr. Silver.

Greg Miller better be shaking in his boots. The number of skeletons in his closet could rank up there with owners in big markets.

And BOOM---Sterling's attorney confirms they will be filing a $1 Billion lawsuit against the NBA (and given the anti-trust claim, against his fellow owners).

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/stor ... -1-billion" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This could be about the juiciest, most expensive lawsuit ever--you have the egos of nearly 30 billionaires involved, plus the reputation of a multi-billion-dollar a year association, all of who are going to be lawyering-the-hell-up.

Edit: I just skimmed the suit, and it's actually a $3 billion lawsuit.

This is high stakes drama. I luv it. Great entertainment fodder.

I really hope Sterling burns the NBA to the ground.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I'm trying to figure out how he has been determined to be mentally incapacitated? Is the NBA qualified to make such a determination? Are the other NBA owners? That seems like an official mental diagnosis.

Mars wrote:
Isn't he selling the Clippers for $2B? If so, how would he have a case?

Donald Sterling's wife sold the Clipper's. He did not want to sell.

Actually, I think he has a good case. The recording made of Donald Sterling was recorded without his knowledge or consent. That is illegal in California. CA law requires all partiers being recorded to have knowledge and give their consent. The fruits of an illegal act are not admissible.

Wait till you see the collection of lawyers that Sterling will throw at the NBA. It will be an All-Star legal team. It's going to be a great show.

Ddawg wrote: The recording made of Donald Sterling was recorded without his knowledge or consent. That is illegal in California... The fruits of an illegal act are not admissible.

In a court of law perhaps. Probably much less so in the boardroom of a private corporation.

Mars wrote:
Isn't he selling the Clippers for $2B? If so, how would he have a case?

He does claim that he had an unsolicited offer for $2.5 billion a couple years ago, and the team/market has only improved since then, so it's not that far-fetched (if he can prove he turned down $2.5B in the past) to convince someone that the $2B selling price was actually a discounted price where the buyer's knew the seller was in a position of weakness given the NBA's actions rather than a fair-market, evenly negotiated purchase. If he really can show that $2.5B offer, I don't think $1B in damages is that hard to get to.

Then if he can win on anti-trust, his damages award can get tripled to $3B.

I think Sterling has one of two goals here--either force the NBA into a painful settlement to avoid what will absolutely be embarrassing, if not debilitating depositions and testimony from executives and owners, or to wage a scorched-earth campaign to get all the dirty laundry from every owner and exec out in the open, regardless of legal outcome.