Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The problem with this is, how do you sue a defunct league? Sure the league signed a 3 year contract with you. The league is no more, no funding, no income. I’m sure they would be more than happy to give you a share of the debt load if you truly want to be part owner. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Bills2ref said:

The problem with this is, how do you sue a defunct league? Sure the league signed a 3 year contract with you. The league is no more, no funding, no income. I’m sure they would be more than happy to give you a share of the debt load if you truly want to be part owner. 

The dudes that found/owned the league still have plenty of money. 

 

This kind of thing happens a lot in situations such as this (businesses failing and not fulfilling promises). Bank pays out the settlement and the sued party pays back the bank over time, with interest, I think. Something like that.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

The dudes that found/owned the league still have plenty of money. 

 

This kind of thing happens a lot in situations such as this (businesses failing and not fulfilling promises). Bank pays out the settlement and the sued party pays back the bank over time, with interest, I think. Something like that.

I highly doubt those brilliant business men didn’t form some type of LLC to abolish their liability. There are very few company types where if it fails you can go after the businessman behind the company. 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted

Dundon and Ebersol are named as individual defendants. Both have tons of money.

 

Dundon, in particular, is your stereotypical scumbag businessman. He saw an opportunity to buy the rights to the league's app tech and then screwed the league/players. Straight up business move with no regard to whoever he was ***** over. And in the long run, he's probably fine with paying the settlement, considering the higher gains he potentially will make in the future.

Posted
6 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

The dudes that found/owned the league still have plenty of money. 

 

This kind of thing happens a lot in situations such as this (businesses failing and not fulfilling promises). Bank pays out the settlement and the sued party pays back the bank over time, with interest, I think. Something like that.

 

Huh???   What bank is signing up for that deal?

 

 

Unless they were not paid for the weeks they were on the roster, this is a frivolous lawsuit and will be rightly tossed.

 

Schmidt is free to seek employment elsewhere.

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, Bills2ref said:

I highly doubt those brilliant business men didn’t form some type of LLC to abolish their liability. There are very few company types where if it fails you can go after the businessman behind the company. 

Even if they made the standard moves to cover their asses, this seems like a favorable situation for the players/coaches/executives. They'll get something out of it, considering how badly they got boned. The league basically straight up lied to them when they constructed these contracts. I assume the lawyers reviewed the contract and concluded that there's some kind of legitimate case here.

Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

. I assume the lawyers reviewed the contract and concluded that there's some kind of legitimate case here.

 

This made me giggle. Since when do lawyers need a “legitimate case”?  LOL

Edited by WotAGuy
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted

I seriously doubt that the backers of this league have any personal liability unless they were officers of the company and committed an illegal act causing specific harm to Schmidt.

As others have said, the AAF is probably an LLC where the owners are merely stockholders. If the LLC files for bankruptcy, employees (players) usually fall in line with other debt holders (and are usually at the end of the line). It is highly improbable that Schmidt will get anything.

Just because an attorney agreed to file a lawsuit, it doesn't mean there is any legitimate enforceable claim.  My bet is the owners of the league have more money, better lawyers, and therefore better legal protection in the existing contracts.

The whole thing seems to really s*** for the players and coaches that committed a lot of effort to the league.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

 

This made me giggle. Since when do lawyers need a “legitimate case”?  LOL

It depends on their payment contract, which we're not privy to. If the lawyers payment is highly contingent on Colton Schmidt getting paid, then obviously they think there's a case. If the payment is largely hourly, then the lawyers might be taking advantage. In cases like this, it's often the former, so I think there's a good chance the players actually have a case.

Edited by nrenegar
Posted
19 minutes ago, nrenegar said:

It depends on their payment contract, which we're not privy to. If the lawyers payment is highly contingent on Colton Schmidt getting paid, then obviously they think there's a case. If the payment is largely hourly, then the lawyers might be taking advantage. In cases like this, it's often the former, so I think there's a good chance the players actually have a case.

 

I understand, but I was thinking more along the lines of “legitimate case” being “reasonable legal basis” as opposed to “take a shot and maybe they’ll flinch and settle” 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Bills2ref said:

The problem with this is, how do you sue a defunct league? Sure the league signed a 3 year contract with you. The league is no more, no funding, no income. I’m sure they would be more than happy to give you a share of the debt load if you truly want to be part owner. 

 

The AAF could still have operational assets somewhere. Yes it might not be much money but having an active lawsuit might let the players get a piece of whatever is left in their operations funds. 

×
×
  • Create New...