Phoenix XXIV: How many twists does the scriptwriter have left?

[pucka lucka]

There has never been a real honest to God deadline before. If there is one now, the courts will move. $$ talks, and there is a lot of it at stake here.

THe courts will jump because the NHL wants to hurry up?

 

[MountainHawk]

First of all, as I stated several pages & a thread or 2 back, why didnt the COG seek this remedy much earlier as it was blatantly clear to one & all that both sides positions were entrenched & intractable?. I couldnt understand why they didnt go after GW for Tortious Interference on the letters of 31/01/11 at a minimum. They pulled the trigger on the Bond Issue & watched their Credit Rating drop; the letters inflaming an already nervous muni bond market, the interest rate spiking (Hulsizer fanning the flames) with the potential of an increase in costs rising to as much as $100M+.

The last thing in the World the NHL would need or want would be litigation of anykind, something they have made abundantly clear, and I can only speculate but it would appear to me that the deal is dead. The league is keeping quiet, allowing Glendale to save face, try and exact its pound of flesh from its protagonist & move on. Now, before committing completely to such speculation, I think its important to take a deep breath & a step back, wait & see what the COG actually does, because this is one poster who gave up long ago trying to guess what they might or might not do. Total schizoids'. Why they didnt run to the Underwriters on December 15th, 2010 at 9am I just dont know. They've had months upon months to iron this thing out & yet here we are at Zero Hour with itchy fingers hovering over the Red Button. The NHL doesnt need this, nor do the fans. Total amateurs.

I don't know. Maybe they are counting on the incredibly tight deadlines now helping them win a court case. Maybe they thought GWI would work with them right up until now. Maybe they just have no ****ing clue. Maybe it's all three.

[mod delete]

 

[MountainHawk]

THe courts will jump because the NHL wants to hurry up?

Courts will accommodate litigants in cases like this, if it is doable while respecting the law.

 

[peter sullivan]

Hopefully we find out in the next week or two, so we can talk about how bogus it'll be when Winnipeg starts getting revenue sharing because their arena is too small.

zing!

cant wait!...i'll be in the 20th row, corner if you need to find me.

 

[AllByDesign]

If the CoG sues the GWI for interference, and the GWI counter sues for violating the gift law, how does any of that help keep a team in Glendale?

Who cares? I hear a law degree being shreded and the creation of a new bead business.

If you elect to respond, please recall ABD's concerns about the thread getting too "legalish". We are deep in the weeds here.

I am touched that you would pay heed to my quip.

goyotes, I stand corrected. Glendale is desperate enough to take this absurd action. You were right, I was mistaken.

Casual Beads sales begin at SFO Intl Arpt on Monday morning.

Might I suggest a second location at the corner of Haight and Ashbury?

See, there is the begging-the-question fallacy rearing its head right there. You are assuming that Walker is "a reasonable estimate" and Hocking is unreasonable. Says who?

According to the COG, since Walker was the only one to make it to the offering memorandum.

Both CF and I are in full agreement that the trasnaction has to be evaluated on its entirety, rather than being broken down into components as you suggest.

Basing the transaction on its entirety is adding multiples of very expensive components. Costing as much as the peril they are trying to avoid.

This could go on for years, to the eternal delight of HFBoards' fans.

I am starting to believe we are all masochists.

 

[dkehler]

First of all, as I stated several pages & a thread or 2 back, why didnt the COG seek this remedy much earlier as it was blatantly clear to one & all that both sides positions were entrenched & intractable?. I couldnt understand why they didnt go after GW for Tortious Interference on the letters of 31/01/11 at a minimum. They pulled the trigger on the Bond Issue & watched their Credit Rating drop; the letters inflaming an already nervous muni bond market, the interest rate spiking (Hulsizer fanning the flames) with the potential of an increase in costs rising to as much as $100M+.

The last thing in the World the NHL would need or want would be litigation of anykind, something they have made abundantly clear, and I can only speculate but it would appear to me that the deal is dead. The league is keeping quiet, allowing Glendale to save face, try and exact its pound of flesh from its protagonist & move on. Now, before committing completely to such speculation, I think its important to take a deep breath & a step back, wait & see what the COG actually does, because this is one poster who gave up long ago trying to guess what they might or might not do. Total schizoids'. Why they didnt run to the Underwriters on December 15th, 2010 at 9am I just dont know. They've had months upon months to iron this thing out & yet here we are at Zero Hour with itchy fingers hovering over the Red Button. The NHL doesnt need this, nor do the fans. Total amateurs.

I may have missed it amongst the noise, but what in the Goldwater letter would constitute tortious interference? I am presuming that providing "factual" information is not actionable, and I don't remember seeing anything that was not factual in the letter. I.e. Goldwater believes the deal may be illegal and is considering taking legal action.

As has been said, the investors likely have their own counsel that can determine for themselves whether or not Goldwater's position has merit or not.

Perhaps one of our learned colleagues that is a lawyer will comment further.

 

[Skarjak]

I don't see why the courts would hurry up just for the NHL. They certainly didn't hurry up for Balsillie when he wanted them to.

 

[billy blaze]

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/Glendale-117471753.html

The league’s patience is reportedly nearing an end, with a resolution required one way or another in a matter of days.
NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly responded to emails to the Winnipeg Free Press on Saturday night but offered no comment, saying he didn’t wish to speculate.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/...t-on-atlanta-stamkos-kaberle-contract-updates

"I don't think this is dead by any means," said a source involved in the situation regarding the Coyotes. Said another source, "It could still be salvaged, but my gut feeling is that it's toast."

i know, more unnamed sources from the evil Canadian media

 

[pucka lucka]

Courts will accommodate litigants in cases like this, if it is doable while respecting the law.

Cases like what? If it was so urgent the, NHL has always had a remedy, move the team.

 

[billy blaze]

Balsillie was never a real factor until the bankruptcy filing, as the NHL was never going to approve him as an owner. So the only way he could have gotten one is to have the bankruptcy court hand it to him over the NHL's objection, which fortunately didn't happen.

arguing your "timelines"- money don't mean s*** to the court docket

 

[MountainHawk]

I don't see why the courts would hurry up just for the NHL. They certainly didn't hurry up for Balsillie when he wanted them to.

Bankruptcy court and litigation are two different balls of wax. In bankruptcy court, the judge has no other concerns other than doing what is best for the creditors, no matter how long it takes. He's not an impartial arbiter, he is defending the creditors' rights.

 

[MountainHawk]

arguing your "timelines"- money don't mean s*** to the court docket

Heh, ok, money doesn't mean anything.

 

[cbcwpg]

So what kind of message is the CoG sending out by suing the GWI and specific board members?

"We don't want any accountability in what we do, so we are going to sue it out of existance!"

 

[billy blaze]

I don't know. Maybe they are counting on the incredibly tight deadlines now helping them win a court case. Maybe they thought GWI would work with them right up until now. Maybe they just have no ****ing clue. Maybe it's all three.

Hopefully we find out in the next week or two, so we can talk about how bogus it'll be when

Winnipeg starts getting revenue sharing because their arena is too small

.

come on now, little research to back this up, your way over your head

 

[Killion]

I would presume that their board of directors would have liability insurance.

Of course. Two policies worth maybe $6M tops combined. But its just crazy-talk to suggest this is going to go anywhere IMO. Its strictly political posturing. The NHL is not going to wait around nor are they going to engage in or be party to these shenanigans. Glendale is pulling a classic; when asked "why did the deal collapse" the Mayor & everyone else at City Hall can simply say "sorry, no comment as its currently before the courts". Even if they win, which they wont IMO, the only victory will be in being able to write Revisionary Biographies. "How Special Interest & Watchdog Groups BK'd my Municipality".

 

[cbcwpg]

This isn't going to go on for years. They are going to present the evidence that GWI interfered with a business transaction, and if they can prove it even when all evidence is considering in a light favorable to GWI, then a summary judgment will be issued against GWI, and this could happen in a matter of days. If that fails, the suit may go on, but the team will move unless some large institutional investors steps up to buy the bonds very quickly, despite the risk.

Sorry, but "matter of days"? Have you ever heard the term "billable hours"? We are talking lawyers here. When has a lawyer ( sorry GS ) ever wanted to rush a case?

 

[Ciao]

Actually, GWI passing around to potential investors that they were considering suing before the lease was even signed put COG on extremely strong ground. COG going after them for interference was almost inevitable at that point.

You may be comfortable, but GWI isn't. Sticking their nose in before it actually happened may turn out to have been a very major mistake.

Do you have some basis for this?

I don't know anything about the law of Arizona, but in Ontario a successful action for intentional interference with economic relations would require proof of three essential elements: (i) intent to injure the plaintiff's economic relations; (ii) interference by illegal or unlawful means; and (iii) resulting economic harm.

The focus here would of course be on the second and third elements.

Some jurisdictions have followed a very narrow test of "unlawful means" limiting that to "an act prohibited by law or statute", while other jurisdictions (such as Ontario) have adopted what is said to be the broadest possible test, which is "an act one is not at liberty to commit." As an example of the latter, see the judgment of Laskin, J.A. for the Ontario Court of Appeal in Reach M.D. Inc. v. Pharamaceutical Manufacturers Association of Canada 2003 CarswellOnt 1944, in which a ruling of the Pharmaceutical Manufacturer's Association prohibiting its members from advertising in a particular medium formed an "unlawful act" because the Association did not have the legal authority to make such an order. For the sane readers (i.e.: the non-lawyers), don't read too much into that example other than it is just one illustration of the principle. There are many others going both ways.

If the first and third elements were proven, I don't think it is at all self-evident that Goldwater used any illegal or unlawful means, without which there would in Ontario be no cause of action.

What is the law in Arizona? Can anyone help us with that?

 

[objectiveposter]

Because fighting for the team keeps them on the NHL's good side, and is why they'll get an expansion franchise to protect the NHL's image that they'll support you if you build them an arena.

lol...and who is going to pay for the expansion fee?
Hulzi?
no one will ever want to pay 180+ million for a hockey team is glendale...maybe in 20 years if the league ever gets a massive tv deal similar to the nfl....but until then theres no chance.

 

[Brodie]

by the time this is over, mork will have passed the bar in Arizona

 

[New User Name]

by the time this is over, mork will have passed the bar in Arizona

By the time this is over some are going to be hoisting a few in a bar

 

[Killion]

I may have missed it amongst the noise, but what in the Goldwater letter would constitute tortious interference?

Yes, the chatters been loud; abbreviated version from our legal minds here on hf;

Pro; several suggested that a case could indeed be made for tortious interference as GW "spooked" the underwriters & potential investors with a "hollow threat". In essence, if they truly believed the deal was illegal, then drop the writ Baby; if not?. Your interfering. Your interference has caused a rise in the interest rate, costing the very taxpayers you profess to protect 10's of millions. Bottom line, you simply dont LIKE what we are doing, the POLICY, and it has nothing to do with the LAW. ....

Con; fewer in number than the pro-side, suggested it was "just silly to suggest or even contemplate a case of tortious interference against GWI". Reason being?. Doesnt cross the threshold to even be considered & or both sides have arguable cases, could take awhile, no one really wins, NHL wont stand for further litigation awaiting disposition, the team & its future once again in the hands of the courts while losses mount.

 

[PitbulI]

This is all just posturing by the NHL. Bettman will allow the COG enough time to find alternatives to keep the team away from Winnipeg.

I believe that the COG is now using PR to get the GWI to back down and will go as far as they can. Will the GWI back off? Perhaps. All the COG needs are those bonds sold and maybe the courts will be worried about the lawsuit the COG brought first before worrying about the impending one the GWI will file once the deal is completed.

 

[Hawker14]

Yes, the chatters been loud; abbreviated version from our legal minds here on hf;

Pro; several suggested that a case could indeed be made for tortious interference as GW "spooked" the underwriters & potential investors with a "hollow threat". In essence, if they truly believed the deal was illegal, then drop the writ Baby; if not?. Your interfering. Your interference has caused a rise in the interest rate, costing the very taxpayers you profess to protect 10's of millions. Bottom line, you simply dont LIKE what we are doing, the POLICY, and it has nothing to do with the LAW. ....

Con; fewer in number than the pro-side, suggested it was "just silly to suggest or even contemplate a case of tortious interference against GWI". Reason being?. Doesnt cross the threshold to even be considered & or both sides have arguable cases, could take awhile, no one really wins, NHL wont stand for further litigation awaiting disposition, the team & its future once again in the hands of the courts while losses mount.

Must've missed the poll.

Mark me down for the Con side. Didn't know that myself rambling on about my opinions on the subject was possibly important !

 

[Ciao]

What analysis needs to take place?


The reason we're all here is because someone thinks it violates the constitution of AZ (GWI), and here we are.


Hulsizer should just go ahead and buy the team WITH HIS OWN MONEY.

He can start charging for parking immediately to help pay the bills, and then he and Glendale can work out a nice little agreement where he sells them those rights. They could do annual payments, you know, to keep things from getting too complicated.

I like this analysis: concise and logical. It follows Will Strunk's legendary advice, "Avoid all unnecessary words."

The longer and more convoluted a so-called "analysis" is the more likely it is to break down. If you can't write your argument on the back of a business card, it isn't much of an argument.

"Hulsizer should just go ahead and buy the team with his own money." Agreed and fitting.

 

[Ciao]

I don't have time to read through all these threads. Can someone enlighten me as to how Goldwater unlawfully interfered by the letter it wrote?

The "s--- or get off the pot" argument doesn't hold water IMO unless there is some authority for that. At the time Goldwater sent the letters in the mail, they were doing exactly what they said they were doing, which is not and was not the least bit unlawful.

I gather I'm in the minority, but I can't keep up with the board to find the majority opinion.