I'm not lawyer, but doesn't the previous ownership have to disclose any outstanding liabilities that are lingering?
Or do you have to ask that question specifically in a way only a lawyer can ask without it being a loophole
They do, but so should the NHL since theyre the ones brokering the deal and doing the investigation. They are all over the tranascation themselves, they can't plead ignorance.
All of this stuff kind of just calls into question what is the actual point of having a head office..so they sign off trade calls but don't apparently maintain a list of NTC, that's on the teams to inform each other. Lmao okay. They find prospective buyers and need to approve of any corporate transactions, but don't need to disclose any investigations theyre doing on the team itself, that's on the seller (their current franchisee). Lmao okay.
Like seriously, they are a franchisor. They don't just get to cop themselves out of all liability between their franchisees, otherwise defund them, cut Bettman back to 4M a year, and run a small team for player safety.
NHL looks like it fumbled the bag hard on this, especially that something so simple took 18 months to investigate, which was of course neatly timed to not blow up the sale of the team.