OK, I'm a lawywer who is confused. Yesterday, David Aldridge said "Like every owner, they signed a "waiver of recourse" clause when they bought the Kings, meaning they would not sue other NBA owners while they own the team.
" (David Aldridge, 5-13-13.) So who are Idiot brothers suing if not the other owners if they sue? I have also read on this site that the HBN group signed a similar waiver when they submitted their "completed agreement" bid to the NBA (which was and is
subject to BOG approval), no? So, who are they going to sue if they did? Where does Seattle get standing to sue? They don't have any money in the game yet - keeping in mind they have consistently told the courts that even the MOU is not a final deal and that they have no final deals with money committed [unlike Sacramento which is putting up real "at-risk" dollars], and ignoring that the bonds they would sell are guaranteed by Hansen. If HBN did not have to sign a waiver of their ability to sue, then Stern's comments from weeks ago when he said he has worked very hard to ensure that the BOG gets the final say is just bullshit. But, I don't think it is. I think the NBA and the Owners changed the franchise agreement enough to ensure that they can't be sued if they turn down a relo or sale request. Why bother doing anything with the franshise agreement if that's not the first thing you do post Donald Sterling? So, somebody with a law degree explain it to me. I don't think anybody can sue anybody.
On a different point, isn't it the case that the Idiots and Heinrich(sp?) formed a holding company of some sort several years ago and that allowed them to transfer 12% to Heinrich without league approval? If that didn't avoid league approval, then all our worries about HBN are unnecessary because the league is dumb, but not that dumb. They know what allowing even 7% to be owned by HBN means. If it didn't need league approval, then that's how the Idiots will sell HBN 20% of what their holding company owns (65%), and avoid the league's approval process.
Now, clearly, if the league says no to relo, HBN really needs to go away. We haven't seen this kind of Maloofery out of someone not a Maloof since the Idiot brothers killed the last arena deal (which got them a state of the art arena with no money out of their pockets, btw).
Clear it up for me my brothers - with legal cites and case histories please.
Again, I really love you guys, and I, for one, am going to try to go to Firestone Public House on Wednesday and, if the word leaks that relo is dead, party my ass off until Grant starts to look like an attractive alternative.
(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)