Quote:
Originally Posted by Midtowner
This shows nothing except for the fact that the court thinks there should be two trials. It's right. The damages issue will be greatly different whether the specific performance part of the contract is enforceable or not and the complexity of the trial would also be greatly different.
If the Sonics win the specific performance issue, expect a quick settlement.
If not, the team will be here in 2011.
|
I think you're conflating damages and specific performance. Basically, there will be no "damages" if the team is held to specific peformance (i.e.- Sonics have to play out the lease). They would have fulfilled their contractual obligation as defined and mandated by the court, so how would there be a breach or damages?
Anyway, like everyone abov eyou said, yes, this basically means very little. It's important to note that the June trial date did not get delayed as a result. The judge could have granted the Sonics' request to enumerate damages in the same trial AND delayed the trial at the same time.
(Nice little primer on equitable v. legal remedies!
)