ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Home Today's Posts
Page 5 of 9
< 12345 6789 >
Nzoner's Game Room>Ongoing St. Louis vs the NFL Litigation Thread
Rams Fan 09:40 PM 07-12-2021
So, as a TLDR warning, basically all these tweets are from today regarding rulings in St. Louis' lawsuit vs the NFL regarding the Rams relocation

Basically, the judge ruled heavily in the city's favor to continue moving forward in the legal process and it looks like this case will go to a jury trial at some point, meaning a bunch of dirty laundry concerning the league is about to be aired.

Tid-bit regarding the Chiefs is that it looks like Clark Hunt's financial information, as well as some other owners aside from Kroenke, will be shared with the city.

At STL City court...STL vs. NFL protective order to asess punitive damages. STL wants discovery of NFL assets, says the legal standard is straightforward.

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


STL says NFL & Kroenke committed "willful or outrageous or reckless act vs. plaintiff rights."

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


STL claims NFL kept discovery confidential. Email from Eric Gruman-"I'm trying to get some terrific L.A. opportunities to fruition under cover of darkness."

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


In deposition, Goodell held relocation guidelines in his hand. Was asked "are these mandatory?" (to abide by) Replied "Counselor, it says right here, (they are).

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


2014 Email from Demoff to NFL says L.A. land story is coming out. League responds "what should we say." Demoff provides talking points that Goodell uses in Super Bowl press conference, denying he knows land purchase by Kroenke is for stadium.

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


Peacock e-mail to Demoff telling him about National Car Rental naming rights deal. Demoff responds with link to YouTube video that screams "F it, I'm out."

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


STL has record of 2013 phone call with Kroenke, Goodell, Mara (Giants) and Rooney (Steelers). Kroenke says "I'm going to buy 2 parcels of land and build a stadium in L.A." Says we're trying very hard to stay under the radar screen and keep it hidden." Goodell: "We will respect

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


Your confidentiality. "

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


Other notes-NFL never intended to force Kroenke to negotiate in good faith.

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


Judge says he needs clear and convincing evidence that about 25 defendants operated in a fraudulent manner, and says he hasn't seen that. Says evidence is necessary to delve into individuals' finances.

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


STL attorney says they received relocation money. That's all we need to know. It was said in owners meeting STL would be harmed."

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


It was confirmed that the Arizona Cardinals voted against the Rams relocation. My sense is the Panthers were the other team that did.

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


Judge says preponderance of evidence exists against Mara, Kraft, Jones, Rooney...one other...for damages. Most NFL owners spared discovery of finances.

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


2 other nuggets: Jerry Jones admitted he urged Kroenke to move. Day after relocation vote, Rams signed contract w/ Jones Legends corp to sell PSL's and luxury boxes.

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


One quick correction: STL has the ability to investigate net worth of NFL, Goodell, Kroenke, Jones, Kraft, Mara, Richardson. They have 10 days to ask for right to investigate other owners. Apparently it's rare for a judge to rule from the bench, as he did for STL here.

— Randy Karraker (@RandyKarraker) July 12, 2021


In today's more than 2-hour hearing that was not publicly docketed, Judge Chris McGraugh said St. Louis plaintiffs showed sufficient evidence to get financials from NFL, Kroenke, Rams, Commissioner Goodell and team owners Jones, Mara, Kraft and Richardson. Story TK @stltoday https://t.co/sDJG6LMNgV

— Joel Currier (@joelcurrier) July 12, 2021


Correction. The judge did not list Goodell among those from whom St. Louis plaintiffs may get financial information. He mentioned Clark Hunt, owner of the KC Chiefs. @Ben_Fred https://t.co/bTnjbh9prn

— Joel Currier (@joelcurrier) July 12, 2021

[Reply]
ThyKingdomCome15 05:56 PM 07-13-2021
The issue is not whether or not STL deserved a team, rather if Stan/NFL negotiated in good faith. It is clear Stan and the NFL did not. STL has a strong case.
[Reply]
oldman 08:26 AM 07-14-2021
Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88:
St. Loser has a long history of trying to sabotage KC’s civic efforts.

They tried to persuade local voters in KC to vote against funding to build the Sprint Center.

And state representatives from the St. Loser-area have a history of not supporting funding for stadium projects/enhancements in KC, while pushing for the state to bankroll these same types of projects in St. Loser.

Where was your appeal for state unity during these situations?
This.

I had to go over to our sister office in the late 90s about 2 blocks from the stadium and thought "What were those people thinking?". It was an eyesore then and I thought about how lucky we were to have Arrowhead. They needed to pump money into it when it was less than 20 years old. Then, they wanted more money to upgrade it again because the locals were dumb enough to buy into that "top quartile" clause.
[Reply]
PunkinDrublic 09:47 AM 07-14-2021
Stan Kroenke probably laughs his off whenever he tells his buddies how bad he fleeced the tax paying rubes of St. Louis.
[Reply]
Rams Fan 09:59 AM 07-14-2021
Originally Posted by PunkinDrublic:
Stan Kroenke probably laughs his off whenever he tells his buddies how bad he fleeced the tax paying rubes of St. Louis.
Nah, that’s John Shaw, the Ram equivalent of Carl Peterson, who asked for the first tier clause and the city officials gave it to them without question.
[Reply]
Spott 11:19 AM 07-14-2021
Originally Posted by Rams Fan:
Nah, that’s John Shaw, the Ram equivalent of Carl Peterson, who asked for the first tier clause and the city officials gave it to them without question.
Without reading into this lawsuit, what is the end game for the City of St Louis? Do they just want money or are they wanting another team?
[Reply]
Deberg_1990 11:30 AM 07-14-2021
I remember going to a Rams game when that dome was fairly new. Around 96-97. The Rams were pretty bad back then so got late season tickets cheap.

It was unremarkable with no character back then and it was new. What a waste of money.
[Reply]
Rams Fan 12:14 PM 07-14-2021
Originally Posted by Spott:
Without reading into this lawsuit, what is the end game for the City of St Louis? Do they just want money or are they wanting another team?
Realistically,$ to pay for the remaining $ owed on paying off the bonds for the Dome and for the expenses for legal fees as well as the task force fees for exploring a new stadium.

There won’t be any NFL in St. Louis unless someone wants to bring a team there and build a private stadium.
[Reply]
jettio 03:34 PM 07-14-2021
I looked up the case.

Seems weird to sue every team and every team's principal owner.

Not sure how strong a case it is to sue under the idea that the NFL relocation policy was not strictly followed. Seems that the relocation policy resulted from the Raiders winning the antitrust case in the early 1980's.

Not sure if NFL will be able to compare how well the relocation policy was followed when St. Louis "attracted" the Rams after the NFL awarded Carolina and Jacksonville the 1994 expansion teams ahead of the St. Louis bid. The first Rams relocation from LA to St. Louis would have occurred while the relocation policy was in place. Who knows how well it was followed then?

Seems like both sides are asking for and getting permission to file case documents under seal.

I suppose it would be interesting to know what bases the NFL Defendants and Teams are arguing for summary judgment.

Seems like summary judgment could be based on the idea that the Relocation policy is not enforceable by these Plaintiffs or, possibly, based on an estoppel argument that the Plaintiffs may have benefitted in 1994 from the same stuff they are complaining about now. The fact that it is LA involved for both moves could matter, I would suppose.

IIRC, Greitens and the GOP in Jefferson City opposed any public assistance to a stadium that would support the MLS bid. St. Louis then put together a privately funded proposal that ended up getting a MLS team. That story might weigh in favor of the Defendants.

Seems like if Kroenke was in a position to have to invest his own money to build a suitable facility, he might have more right to relocate and build it where it is arguably a much better investment.

It wonder if the NFL will have the nerve to say that the XFL team in St. Louis won some games and therefore mitigated damages.

St. Louis may have been the best soccer city in the USA before the 1994 World Cup and MLS. St. Louis may just have to be happy to have Cardinals in MLB, Blues in NHL, and the new MLS team.

This case might end up moving a few dollars around, but case seems like a jobs program for lawyers more than anything else.
[Reply]
Rams Fan 01:28 PM 09-22-2021

No surprise here, but the Missouri Supreme Court has denied the #Rams/#NFL appeal to stop the handing over of detailed financial information of Stan Kroenke and other owners that were approved for the pursuit of potential punitive damages.

— Ben Frederickson (@Ben_Fred) September 22, 2021


In short, Team STL moves closer to having full, open books of following owners/entities in order to build case for punitive damages: #NFL, Rams, Kroenke, Kraft, Richardson, Hunt, Mara, Jones. Protective order protects information, but what gets out in hearings/trial is public. https://t.co/v8jPtQjzdF

— Ben Frederickson (@Ben_Fred) September 22, 2021


Heh.
[Reply]
Sassy Squatch 01:46 PM 09-22-2021
No way the NFL doesn't try to settle at this point.
[Reply]
Sassy Squatch 01:47 PM 09-22-2021
The judge is pretty hilarious too. Just the right amount of subtle pettiness.
[Reply]
Rams Fan 01:53 PM 09-22-2021
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
No way the NFL doesn't try to settle at this point.
I don't see STL trying to settle, though.

I think they're going to go scorched earth, make an example of the NFL, and win a shit ton of money.

Originally Posted by Superturtle:
The judge is pretty hilarious too. Just the right amount of subtle pettiness.
Oh yeah. Rams requested a change of venue and the judge denied it because, as a part of the Rams argument for relocating, they said there wasn't a large following. The judge's point is that if that's the case, then why is a change of venue needed? :-)
[Reply]
smithandrew051 01:56 PM 09-22-2021
We’re in this weird timeline where I’m cheering for St Louis
[Reply]
Sassy Squatch 01:56 PM 09-22-2021
Originally Posted by Rams Fan:
I don't see STL trying to settle, though.

I think they're going to go scorched earth, make an example of the NFL, and win a shit ton of money.



Oh yeah. Rams requested a change of venue and the judge denied it because, as a part of the Rams argument for relocating, they said there wasn't a large following. The judge's point is that if that's the case, then why is a change of venue needed? :-)
Same. NFL may just wait for the appeals process but whatever financials get exposed when they open the books for punitive damages is going to sting mich worse than any damages they have to pay.
[Reply]
New World Order 01:59 PM 09-22-2021
Originally Posted by smithandrew051:
We’re in this weird timeline where I’m cheering for St Louis
I tried, but I just can’t do it
[Reply]
Page 5 of 9
< 12345 6789 >
Up

vBulletin; Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.