It's purely an equitable remedy he's seeking as far as I know.

For equitable remedies, there is no jury trial -- there's no right to it and there's no possibility of it.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

His remedy might be one in equity...but he is alleging "fraud". Whether or not there was fraud is a "fact" question that must be determined at a trial by a "trier of fact" (jury). Unless both sides waive jury. That may be the best thing for Clay and bunch because the jury would be Seattle folks...but if they don't waive it would have to be to a jury.

Yes, fraud is a question of fact which is for the jury to decide. The remedies portion of the trial would be a separate issue. If the jury decides there was fraud, it's up to the judge to impose an equitable remedy.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

And if a jury (or judge if all waive JT) finds fraud...PBC has problems.

Maybe, maybe not. Since Schultz has only asked for an equitable remedy, actually getting one, even if there is fraud, is not guaranteed.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

The "throw as much **** at the wall and see if anything sticks" strategy continues.....

Breach of contract alleged in Sonics suit
By Jim Brunner

Seattle Times staff reporter


Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz added a "breach of contract" claim Tuesday to his lawsuit against Sonics owner Clay Bennett — arguing Bennett failed to honor the terms of his purchase agreement when he proposed a $500 million arena plan he knew was doomed to fail.

In an amended complaint filed in federal court, Schultz's attorneys argued that Bennett's Oklahoma City-based partnership breached its contract with Schultz by failing to use "good faith best efforts" for a full 12 months to get an arena deal in the Seattle area.

That requirement was set out in the purchase and sale agreement when Bennett's group bought the Sonics and Storm in 2006 for $350 million.

Instead of proposing a reasonable arena plan, Schultz's latest filing claims Bennett pushed a $500 million Renton arena that would have required "unprecedented amounts in public subsidies" with lease terms Bennett "knew would be unacceptable" to state lawmakers.

After the Legislature rejected that plan in April 2007, Bennett "ceased meaningful efforts" to land a deal instead of continuing through last October, as required by his contract with Schultz, the new lawsuit filing claims.

The latest Schultz filing contained no new revelation or internal Sonics e-mails. But it does add the "breach of contract" argument to the "negligent misrepresentation" and "fraudulent inducement" claims previously asserted in the lawsuit — giving a judge or jury another possible reason to rule against the team.

Schultz filed the lawsuit, citing e-mails uncovered in the city of Seattle's separate lawsuit against Bennett's group which showed Sonics owners enthusiastically chatting about moving the team to Oklahoma.

The lawsuit, filed last month seeks to have the Sonics placed into a "constructive trust" by the court, which could then transfer the team back to local owners. No trial date has been set.

A spokesman for Bennett could not be reached for comment Tuesday evening. In the past, Bennett has defended his efforts on the $500 million Renton arena, noting that he spent millions of dollars on the proposal.

Sonics | Breach of contract alleged in Sonics suit | Seattle Times Newspaper

Seems like he just wants a more legit claim thrown in there, as the "constructive trust" argument is so out there, he might need to put something more concrete down. Also, this has a chance of forcing them to actual trial on that, as "good faith efforts" would be a question of fact for a jury to decide.

I am getting sick of this sh*t.

A breech of a contract that Schultz himself claims should even exist? What I don't understand in all of this is that Bennett has owned the team for 2 years and they are still located in Seattle. If the requirment was to keep the team in Seattle then for crying out loud - they are still there. Shouldn't these lawsuits be filed AFTER the team leaves Seattle.

__________________
Oklahoma City - The surprise your family has been looking for.

Me too. I don't see any way you could get a fair jury trial on this issue in Seattle or Oklahoma City. This would be like trying to get a fair jury trial in Seattle regarding Seattle relocating Boeing headquarters. People in Seattle may not want to pay for the team, pay for it's building or even go to the games. But that doesn't mean they want someone else to have them. I wish I could have faith in a trial by jury, but people are human, and humans aren't always completely impartial and reasonable, even when serving on a jury.

This is normal in the law. It was explained to me like this: I never borrowed your pot, it was broken when you gave it to me, you broke it after I gave it back to you in good condition. All of those can be used as defenses at the same time.

IMO, a jury trial could be a good thing, if they can narrow it down to people that really have no interest in BB.

It seems a majority of people in Seattle have no interest in the Sonics or where they play. If PBC can get enough of those people on the jury, then it becomes more about the law, and less about feelings.

I think ti's still in Seattle's best interst to settle. Best case scenario, they have the Sonics stay, make very little money off it, they leave in 2 years anyway, and Caly & Co. don't pay off the KeyArena debt. I mean, that's their BEST case scenario! I can' tbelieve they're spending taxpayer dollars on this.

This whole thing is starting to make me weary. I don't think Schultz will win his case but I do believe they will be there til the end of the lease. It's obvious that Seattle doesn't care about thier future with the NBA. It is all about ego now. They can't seem to grasp that a bunch of Oklahomans are getting the best of them.

What is good about all of this is that nobody outside of the Seattle or OKC markets really care or aren't making much noise about the situation.

Saberman - it isn't that a majority of people in Seattle have no interest in basketball, according to Ballmer's own survey 50% of Washington state wants the Sonics to leave. That is pretty good odds on getting at least on member of the jury to have reasonable doubt. I say go for the jury trial.

__________________
Oklahoma City - The surprise your family has been looking for.

Civil juries don't work that way Kerry.

__________________
It's a friendlier OKCTalk!

I am not a real attorney, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Select.

__________________
Oklahoma City - The surprise your family has been looking for.

I just ran across this Seattle area article...It seems to make some good points and it makes me wonder if that "sweet flip" email may just come into play with the Schultz case...Apologies if this article has already been discussed

http://www.crosscut.com/washington-legislature/13664/Does+Clay+Bennett's+'sweet+flip'+exonerate+him

**Not sure why my link didn't work**

__________________
Dwight Schrute: Reject a woman and she will never let it go. One of the many defects of their kind. Also, weak arms.

The sweet flip email, in my mind, just reaffirms Clay's intention to not remove the team from Seattle. The "good faith" was needed to find an arena deal in Seattle. Never was the good faith deal that Clay had to own the team in Seattle...just keep the team in Seattle. If he sells the team after an arena deal is made, how is that not good faith to keep the team in Seattle? Answer: it's more than good faith.

and the twists continue......

Move plan denied by McClendon | NewsOK.com

Hopefully the people who backed out of the deal because the team wasn't definitely moving will be able to back up that story in court. I agree with OKCMallen that the "sweet flip" if anything proves there was some acceptance of the possibility of the team staying, and negates a definite "plan" to move the team immediately. Schultz never specified that the Bennett ownership group had to own the team indefinitely, nor was that ever clearly a major part of the discussion as it's never mentioned in the side letter.

Looks like the other side has some dirty hands as well...Big shock

Sonics minority owner surprised arena deal not made

**On the flip side, the Sonics' lawyers sharply questioned Tim Ceis, the deputy mayor of Seattle, about whether he tried to undercut Bennett's efforts to build a new arena in Renton.

In his deposition, Ceis acknowledged he "did express our concerns about the status of KeyArena should a new arena be built" and that he hoped the Legislature would consider giving financial assistance to the city to deal with the remaining debt at the arena if Bennett's effort had succeeded.

The attorney asked Ceis if he lobbied against the Renton facility, but Ceis said he merely had informal discussions with several state politicians in order to remind them that Seattle would need help in such a situation.

In a separate deposition, Seattle City Council president Richard Conlin said he had conversations with "nine or more legislators" from the Seattle area expressing concerns over the Renton proposal's effect on KeyArena, including communications with House Speaker Frank Chopp.

Conlin said the Renton proposal would "cause some potential problems and was not the best choice."

Ceis also acknowledged the city knew Initiative 91 might present problems for its $300 million KeyArena renovation proposal and that he told the NBA one of the potential solutions was having the city council repeal the initiative, which was approved by 70 percent in a vote of Seattle residents in a request to only give public money to stadium projects that provided an agreed-upon rate of return.

He said another option might have been to transfer ownership of KeyArena "to the state or another public authority" so it was no longer a city facility. But Ceis insisted the best way to deal with I-91 would be to comply with its restrictions, which he thought was possible once Steve Ballmer's group agreed to fund half the proposal with private money.

As for why the city was pushing to keep the team after voters had openly rejected such a financing plan, Ceis said, "In politics you sometimes must lead even though the public may not yet be aware of all the issues and may not have yet finally determined where they are."

Sonics attorney Brad Taylor also repeatedly asked Ceis if the city has an understanding with the K&L Gates law firm about what communication it can and cannot have with Ballmer's group about city-privileged matters, since the firm represented both groups at various times.

Taylor called the ploy "a shell game" and indicated there "obviously is going to be some major issues as far as K&L Gates as far as the attorney/client privilege."

Ceis indicated in his testimony that Walker, one of the minority partners in Howard Schultz's ownership group, began advising the city in the fall of 2007 after contacting the city and saying "he'd be available to help in our efforts to enforce the lease."

Taylor later pointed out that Walker also was advising the Ballmer group.

The Sonics' attorney also questioned Ceis about not upholding a confidentiality agreement made during a meeting with NBA officials in New York. Ceis acknowledged he told Save Our Sonics founder Brian Robinson of the meeting, but didn't disclose what was discussed.**

Love this part...Sure I didn't disclose what was discussed **wink wink**

Ceis acknowledged he told Save Our Sonics founder Brian Robinson of the meeting, but didn't disclose what was discussed.**

__________________
Dwight Schrute: Reject a woman and she will never let it go. One of the many defects of their kind. Also, weak arms.

It looks to me like the City of Seattle has some explaining to do. In about 3 weeks they will get their chance.

__________________
Oklahoma City - The surprise your family has been looking for.

From newsok.com.......

Seattle officials lobbied against arena funding
By Randy Ellis
Staff Writer

The current and former president of the Seattle City Council lobbied Washington state lawmakers last year against helping fund construction of a new NBA arena in various cities in the greater Seattle area, testimony has revealed.

“I’d say I probably talked to half of the members of the Seattle delegation,” Seattle City Council President Richard Conlin testified in a deposition released this week. He was a council member at the time and became president five months ago.

Seattle Councilman Nick Licata, who was president in 2007, said he also lobbied against providing substantial public funding.

Licata said he encouraged lawmakers not to “make a large public investment.”

The SuperSonics’ Oklahoma owners have accused Seattle city officials of duplicity. The owners contend city officials privately sabotaged their efforts to obtain a new arena that could have made the team economically viable while publicly accusing the owners of failing to make a good faith effort to keep the team in the Seattle.

Conlin said city council members wanted the Sonics to stay in Seattle's KeyArena and believed construction of a new arena in Bellevue, Renton or some other nearby location would not be in the city's best interest.

"Well, our preference is, we think that KeyArena is an excellent facility,” Conlin said of his discussions with lawmakers. "And so we suggested that KeyArena was a very good place to maintain the basketball team. And that, in, fact, if you built another arena, that that could potentially not work well for the region in terms of having two competing venues.”

Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis said he also talked to Washington legislators about the Oklahoma owners' efforts to obtain public money to finance a new arena in the Seattle area, but said he would not characterize his discussions as lobbying.

"I did not ask them to take an action one way or another,” Ceis said.

He said he told lawmakers that if they did fund a new arena, he hoped they would also provide financial assistance to the City of Seattle so it could meet its debt obligations on KeyArena.



Seattle officials lobbied against arena funding | NewsOK.com

Oops! That might help explain Frank Chopp's "dead in the water" comment about Bennett's arena proposal one day after he presented it to the Washington Legislature

Full McClendon Deposition posted in pdf, http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABP...2004436369.pdf