RealGM

These morons claim that the lease that Bennett signed with them would be valid even if the courts void the sale! Always good strategy to educate the judge in what she (or he) can do.

"We are unaware of a legal theory that would render the OKC NBA agreements voidable, regardless of the outcome" of the Seattle litigation, Williams wrote in the nine-page letter addressed to Schultz attorney Richard Yarmuth.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004404211_websonics09m.html

More links...
TNT Sonics Blog (Eric Williams)
http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/sonics/2008/05/09/okc_to_schultz_bring_sonics_here_or_we_l

The letter...
http://blogmedia.thenewstribune.com/media/users/ericwilliams/OKCletter.pdf

This is getting messy...excellent.

Honestly they signed the lease with PBC, if the sale is rescinded, How are they going to hold Schultz to a contract that was not even party too?

In his letter, Wiley Williams wrote on behalf of Mayor Mick Cornett and other Oklahoma City officials that they had been preparing for the Sonics long before the NBA Board of Governors approved the team's relocation request on April 18.

If Shultz's lawyer is smart, he will ask "How long before the approval?"

I still think the OKC mayor may have been privy to the owners game plan to move the sonics at the time of the sale. I mean, come on, it is pretty clear they bought the team to move AND they would had to line up the political commitments before committing to the sale in advance.

yearsago wrote:Honestly they signed the lease with PBC, if the sale is rescinded, How are they going to hold Schultz to a contract that was not even party too?

Well then you could say the same thing about Bennett?

There has to be some kind of rule that forbids teams signing leases while having a valid lease with another arena

Great, another lawsuit.

read brian robinsons take on this. i thin he is right on the money:

http://sonicscentral.com/blog/?p=1897


remember, bennett signed the lease with okc several days BEFORE the BOG approved the move.

Not being a legal expert or anything, but I believe that if the original sale contract is deemed to be fraudulent, then all subsequent deals made based on that contract are void. Seems to me that OKC will have weak legs to stand on here if the courts side with Schultz on the original sale.

OKC has no legs to stand on. I'm sure it's Bennett getting into their ear to try and "scare" Seattle. What they don't realize is that isn't going to work, I'm glad the city of Seattle (I use to live in the area when I was 10 for a couple years) is working hard to keep the team, because they shouldn't be moved. What I think is going to happen is we'll have a new agreement where the Sonics are sold back to Seattle with a New Key Arena deal to remodel it and the Memphis Grizzlies will be sold to Clay Bennett and they'll be moved to be called the Oklahoma Grizzlies, on the plus side they wouldn't have to do new divisions and it makes more geographical sense.

It pisses me off that the OKC letter to Yarmuth & Schultz includes the words "good faith." At this point anyone involved with moving the Sonics on the OKC side has no clue what the term means.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/l ... cs10m.html

According to the letter, Oklahoma City is prepared to sue if the team doesn't relocate.

"We expect that any subsequent owner or owners would join hands with the city, and its citizens, and honor the OKC NBA agreements, made in good faith, and perform as good corporate neighbors to make NBA basketball a success in Oklahoma City," Williams wrote.

That entire statement made me barf. "Join hands?" This is utterly ridiculous. How on earth can they have any legal ground to make someone else follow through on an agreement they weren't even privy to? The fact is, they are grasping at straws now....telling Schultz he will have to play in OKC if he wins the court case makes it appear OKC feels they don't have enough confidence in Bennett to win the case. JMO.

Mr. Sun wrote:

In his letter, Wiley Williams wrote on behalf of Mayor Mick Cornett and other Oklahoma City officials that they had been preparing for the Sonics long before the NBA Board of Governors approved the team's relocation request on April 18.

If Shultz's lawyer is smart, he will ask "How long before the approval?"

I still think the OKC mayor may have been privy to the owners game plan to move the sonics at the time of the sale. I mean, come on, it is pretty clear they bought the team to move AND they would had to line up the political commitments before committing to the sale in advance.

Without a doubt, I definately agree. I sense some shady dealings going on.

OKC does have a valid lease. They can enforce it against the counterparty -- specifically, the Basketball Club LLC or whatever that entity is called. After the LLC sells the team back to Schultz's LLC, there's still an enforceable obligation that it will have to satisfy. They'll have to work that out between themselves. Not our problem.

Ex-hippie wrote: They'll have to work that out between themselves. Not our problem.

Yup. I loved Richard Yarmuth's reply, that the OKC lease has nothing at all to do with Schultz's lawsuit.

kombayn wrote:OKC has no legs to stand on. I'm sure it's Bennett getting into their ear to try and "scare" Seattle. What they don't realize is that isn't going to work, I'm glad the city of Seattle (I use to live in the area when I was 10 for a couple years) is working hard to keep the team, because they shouldn't be moved. What I think is going to happen is we'll have a new agreement where the Sonics are sold back to Seattle with a New Key Arena deal to remodel it and the Memphis Grizzlies will be sold to Clay Bennett and they'll be moved to be called the Oklahoma Grizzlies, on the plus side they wouldn't have to do new divisions and it makes more geographical sense.

You were 10 for a couple of years? How'd you manage that?

Anyways, I'm not a Sonics fan nor a US resident, but I hope the Sonics stay in Seattle. It's quite obvious Bennett is a scumbag. If the Sonics would somehow deserve to be moved (not my opinion, just hypothetical), this definitely isn't how.

Doesn't this just feel like the end of one of those movies where everyone and their henchmen are pointing guns and each other and everyone knows that if any one of them fires they will all die? To me OKC just pulled their gun.

Sadly for them though, they may find they have no amo because as Brian said, the move was only approved for one year.

KingInExile wrote:Not being a legal expert or anything, but I believe that if the original sale contract is deemed to be fraudulent, then all subsequent deals made based on that contract are void. Seems to me that OKC will have weak legs to stand on here if the courts side with Schultz on the original sale.

OKC's threat is against the wrong party. If sale fraud is upheld then OKC's only viable recourse for damages would be in suing Clay Bennett and his cronies.

When are the dates for the Seattle v Bennett and Schultz v Bennett trials? Is a date even set for Schultz v Bennett?

OldSchoolNoBull wrote:When are the dates for the Seattle v Bennett and Schultz v Bennett trials? Is a date even set for Schultz v Bennett?

Seattle v. PBC starts June 16th, I think.

Don't know about the Schulz case.

Here's something in today's paper about the deposition last month. (Nickels being grilled by PBC's lawyers).


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/s ... cs15m.html