Does this mean H Sultz suit is done?

wiff · Post #3 » by **wiff** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 12:22 am

No, but we as fans are hanging on by a thread.

richboy · Post #4 » by **richboy** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 12:24 am

No. Shultz will likely ask a judge to stop any movement to OKC until a decision can be made in his case.

Mr. Sun · Post #5 » by **Mr. Sun** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 12:30 am

City could had settled because of the Shultz suit knowing it would be another painful thorn in Bennett's side. If Shultz lawyers can show enough evidence they stand a good chance to preveil at trial they can get a restraining order to block the move. City makes $$$ while Sonics still stuck in park.

Post #6 » by **mojomarc** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 12:41 am

I'm really surprised that Bennett didn't tie the initial settlement to Schultz dropping the suit. I guess the OKC side was really, really nervous about what the judge would rule so they jumped on the settlement bandwagon without any guarantees from Schultz. I guess they really didn't want to play in an empty Key for two years while the excitement in OKC died down....

Post #7 » by **Sweezo** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 12:44 am

mojomarc wrote:I'm really surprised that Bennett didn't tie the initial settlement to Schultz dropping the suit. I guess the OKC side was really, really nervous about what the judge would rule so they jumped on the settlement bandwagon without any guarantees from Schultz. I guess they really didn't want to play in an empty Key for two years while the excitement in OKC died down....

It sounds like they tried to do that, but Schultz wasn't on board. Howard's going to have to get an injunction pronto though if that's going to mean anything because the moving vans are probably already lining up...

vegas_runnin_rebel · Post #8 » by **vegas_runnin_rebel** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 1:17 am

Let's pretend for a second that the league is serious about giving Seattle another team in the next few years (I know, huge stretch)...

Would Howard's lawsuit anger King Stern and jeopardize the possibility of getting another team in Seattle?

nwsports253 · Post #9 » by **nwsports253** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 1:36 am

They just said on KJR that theres a report that Schultz is going to drop is lawsuit because it would hurt the cities chances on getting another team.

Post #10 » by **Sweezo** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 1:41 am

nwsports253 wrote:They just said on KJR that theres a report that Schultz is going to drop is lawsuit because it would hurt the cities chances on getting another team.

In other words, a convenient out for Schultz who may not have the resources or the time to go through with his trial...

Actually, yeah, Schultz is done. Here's some language from the settlement per SC:

The agreement also includes language regarding a lawsuit filed against PBC by the Sonics’ former ownership group The Basketball Club of Seattle, headed by Howard Schultz. Under terms of the settlement, if PBC is prevented from playing home games in Oklahoma City in the 2008-09 or 2009-10 seasons as a result of the Schultz suit, the City will repay PBC $22.5 million for each season. In addition, if PBC is required to play in KeyArena in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons as a result of the Schultz suit, PBC is released from its obligation to make the $30 million contingent payment.

Soooo...either Schultz was in on the settlement, or someone at the City royally screwed him over. Want I wouldn't give to see Schultz go forward and make the City bleed money. Hurts the tax base, but oh...how bad that would look for the City government.

Post #11 » by **Charcoal Filtered** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:17 am

I think Schultz was just trying to salvage his name.

Sorry, he knew what was going to happen.

TheUrbanZealot · Post #12 » by **TheUrbanZealot** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:25 am

Sweezo wrote:
nwsports253 wrote:They just said on KJR that theres a report that Schultz is going to drop is lawsuit because it would hurt the cities chances on getting another team.

In other words, a convenient out for Schultz who may not have the resources or the time to go through with his trial...

Actually, yeah, Schultz is done. Here's some language from the settlement per SC:

The agreement also includes language regarding a lawsuit filed against PBC by the Sonics’ former ownership group The Basketball Club of Seattle, headed by Howard Schultz. Under terms of the settlement, if PBC is prevented from playing home games in Oklahoma City in the 2008-09 or 2009-10 seasons as a result of the Schultz suit, the City will repay PBC $22.5 million for each season. In addition, if PBC is required to play in KeyArena in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons as a result of the Schultz suit, PBC is released from its obligation to make the $30 million contingent payment.

Soooo...either Schultz was in on the settlement, or someone at the City royally screwed him over. Want I wouldn't give to see Schultz go forward and make the City bleed money. Hurts the tax base, but oh...how bad that would look for the City government.

Lol, Sweezo not you too? Come on man, how anyone could side w/ Schultz is beyond me. He is the cause of this dilemma to begin with! Schultz never had a connection w/ the city because he feels the city jobbed him anyways. Schultz essentially has just been trying to save face, and get some extra settlement money in the process. I don't blame him though...

At this point if there is any animosity, it should go towards Howard Schultz. Bennett, the city, they are just pawns in the process...

yearsago · Post #13 » by **yearsago** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:26 am

The city railroaded Howard schultz. Now the story is he is still going to go through with lawsuit, but will not file a injunction.

Post #14 » by **Sweezo** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 4:53 am

TheUrbanZealot wrote:
Sweezo wrote:
nwsports253 wrote:They just said on KJR that theres a report that Schultz is going to drop is lawsuit because it would hurt the cities chances on getting another team.

In other words, a convenient out for Schultz who may not have the resources or the time to go through with his trial...

Actually, yeah, Schultz is done. Here's some language from the settlement per SC:

The agreement also includes language regarding a lawsuit filed against PBC by the Sonics’ former ownership group The Basketball Club of Seattle, headed by Howard Schultz. Under terms of the settlement, if PBC is prevented from playing home games in Oklahoma City in the 2008-09 or 2009-10 seasons as a result of the Schultz suit, the City will repay PBC $22.5 million for each season. In addition, if PBC is required to play in KeyArena in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons as a result of the Schultz suit, PBC is released from its obligation to make the $30 million contingent payment.

Soooo...either Schultz was in on the settlement, or someone at the City royally screwed him over. Want I wouldn't give to see Schultz go forward and make the City bleed money. Hurts the tax base, but oh...how bad that would look for the City government.

Lol, Sweezo not you too? Come on man, how anyone could side w/ Schultz is beyond me. He is the cause of this dilemma to begin with! Schultz never had a connection w/ the city because he feels the city jobbed him anyways. Schultz essentially has just been trying to save face, and get some extra settlement money in the process. I don't blame him though...

At this point if there is any animosity, it should go towards Howard Schultz. Bennett, the city, they are just pawns in the process...

Naw, I don't expect Schultz to do anything...I was just saying I would enjoy it if he did...

BrockEvil · Post #15 » by **BrockEvil** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 5:36 am

I just saw on Q13 that Schultz still plans to go on with his lawsuit...

jenn_gp · Post #16 » by **jenn_gp** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 7:18 am

What are the odds that in a few weeks this case will even exist? I doubt Schultz will go through with it...
This picture says it all
http://img202.imagevenue.com/img.php?im ... _514lo.jpg

S0yb3anB0y · Post #17 » by **S0yb3anB0y** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 7:47 am

vegas_runnin_rebel wrote:Let's pretend for a second that the league is serious about giving Seattle another team in the next few years (I know, huge stretch)...

Would Howard's lawsuit anger King Stern and jeopardize the possibility of getting another team in Seattle?

Vegas, Sorry man but WHO GIVES A **** if Stern is angry.

pr0wler · Post #18 » by **pr0wler** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 8:27 am

I still don't quite get how everyone, and I mean EVERYONE is acting like the Sonics are gone for sure? Isn't the Schultz case, the one where we can use the emails to our favour, a trump card over what took place today? It's not exactly a slam dunk case but I've heard a lot of people say that we have a chance to win this so why does it seem like everyone has forgotten that angle? Or am I missing something...

S0yb3anB0y · Post #19 » by **S0yb3anB0y** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 10:38 am

pr0wler wrote:I still don't quite get how everyone, and I mean EVERYONE is acting like the Sonics are gone for sure? Isn't the Schultz case, the one where we can use the emails to our favour, a trump card over what took place today? It's not exactly a slam dunk case but I've heard a lot of people say that we have a chance to win this so why does it seem like everyone has forgotten that angle? Or am I missing something...

You just made my day by saying that (even though I still haven't slept and its 3:38 AM). I STILL HAVE HOPE. Am I being naive?

Awoooga · Post #20 » by **Awoooga** » Thu Jul 3, 2008 3:09 pm

Everyone is acting like its done because it basically is. It is very hard are very rare for a Court to unwind a large sale from two years ago, and moving the team to Oklahoma City will make that option non-existant.

If he wins the suit, Schultz might get monetary damages to compensate him for the loss suffered but there is no chance of the judge ordering specific performance (ie: moving the team back Seattle and unwinding the original contract). Sorry to rain on your parade but reality is reality.