TrueGSU.com

Follow GSUFANS.com on
     
Page 30 of 31 FirstFirst ... 28293031 LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 305

Thread: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

  1. #291

    Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

    Never knew we had some many attorneys with inside information on this board.

  2. Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    I don't think they can go back and add the school/BOR or employees acting in official capacity. That's my understanding of the basis for sovereign immunity. Can't sue the government.
    I thought it was more of a procedural thing. Something for an appeals court to deal with-like the initial level doesn't have the authority.

  3. #293

    Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

    Quote Originally Posted by ks eagle 76 View Post
    Never knew we had some many attorneys with inside information on this board.
    I assume you're talking about me? I specifically stated that I wasn't an attorney, and everything I posted is public knowledge/publicly available.

    I have no idea how any of these things will bear on this case. As usual I'm just trying to make sure we all are starting with the best information possible to inform our inevitable speculations.

    For all we know these questions may be moot and there never were two contracts.
    Last edited by GATAlac El Dorado; 30th November 2017 at 12:30 PM.

  4. #294
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Endless Summer
    Posts
    12,134

    Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

    Quote Originally Posted by ks eagle 76 View Post
    Never knew we had some many attorneys with inside information on this board.
    Where is Opie when you need him??

  5. Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

    Quote Originally Posted by GATAlac El Dorado View Post
    I'm no attorney, but regardless of how this turns out I'm pretty sure you're wrong on all of your legal assumptions.

    Oral contracts can be enforceable

    Even when they're not, a contract is created when there is an 1.offer, 2. acceptance, and 3. consideration. The question would be "Is an unsigned offer an offer?" which is for the court to decide.

    Last, his subsequent employment likely has no bearing on the question of whether there may be damages.

    I'll leave the rest for the real experts.

    You are correct in that some verbal contracts are enforceable. I do not know what determines if a verbal agreement versus a signed agreement is needed. Ultimately they did sign the new agreement.

    The basis of my legal assumptions is whether the original contract is enforceable. Since the State (GS/BOR)are no longer parties to the agreement, then it may come down to whether the AF verbally agreed to D&G on the original contract. We obviously don't know that, and I wonder if the AF could be bound by a verbal agreement from another party (i.e. TK agrees with D&G on the contract representing the "GS" parties)? That would be an interesting topic to discuss as I can't see the school, the BOR, and the AF all sitting at the table negotiating with a coach together.

    It seems they were not suing for punitive damages. Per Nathan Deen's article from yesterday their attorney is quoted as saying they are not suing for punitive damages, just the amount they are owed. $41,250 for G and $37,500 for Dean. Dean's current salary is pertinent to this amount as most coaching contracts will reduce the guaranteed monthly payment following termination by any pay for a new position. Dean's current salary would reduce or possibly eliminate this amount owed (assuming D&G win the case).
    Ken Smith
    1988 -BS Computer Science
    Suwanee Ga.

  6. #296
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Snellville, GA
    Posts
    7,118

    Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

    Quote Originally Posted by gwinnetteagle88 View Post
    You are correct in that some verbal contracts are enforceable. I do not know what determines if a verbal agreement versus a signed agreement is needed. Ultimately they did sign the new agreement.

    The basis of my legal assumptions is whether the original contract is enforceable. Since the State (GS/BOR)are no longer parties to the agreement, then it may come down to whether the AF verbally agreed to D&G on the original contract. We obviously don't know that, and I wonder if the AF could be bound by a verbal agreement from another party (i.e. TK agrees with D&G on the contract representing the "GS" parties)? That would be an interesting topic to discuss as I can't see the school, the BOR, and the AF all sitting at the table negotiating with a coach together.

    It seems they were not suing for punitive damages. Per Nathan Deen's article from yesterday their attorney is quoted as saying they are not suing for punitive damages, just the amount they are owed. $41,250 for G and $37,500 for Dean. Dean's current salary is pertinent to this amount as most coaching contracts will reduce the guaranteed monthly payment following termination by any pay for a new position. Dean's current salary would reduce or possibly eliminate this amount owed (assuming D&G win the case).
    I dont know if the assistant coach contracts have "buy out" clauses, but if they do both of them have current jobs in coaching so the amount owed in that case could technically be reduced by the amounts of their current salaries.
    Anything worth shooting is worth shooting twice. Ammo is cheap. Life is expensive

  7. Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

    Quote Originally Posted by KJ Eagle View Post
    I dont know if the assistant coach contracts have "buy out" clauses, but if they do both of them have current jobs in coaching so the amount owed in that case could technically be reduced by the amounts of their current salaries.
    They do have termination "buy out" clauses. I downloaded the lawsuit earlier in the fall and it contains copies of both contracts. The amount owed to the coaches would be offset by their new pay. Interestingly I noticed there are only three signatures needed on the contract (coach, BOR rep, and AF Rep). The original contract only has the coaches signatures.

    There is also a clause (section 14) where the AF guarantees the payment if the University does not have sufficient funds or is prohibited by law to pay. I wonder if this will be looked at since the university has been removed as party in the case?
    Ken Smith
    1988 -BS Computer Science
    Suwanee Ga.

  8. #298

    Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

    I've studied quite a bit of law and can pretty much guarantee it went down similar to Cuyler v. Halen.



  9. #299

    Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud


  10. #300

    Default Re: Former OC's to Sue Georgia Southern for Fraud

    Quote Originally Posted by gwinnetteagle88 View Post
    They do have termination "buy out" clauses. I downloaded the lawsuit earlier in the fall and it contains copies of both contracts. The amount owed to the coaches would be offset by their new pay. Interestingly I noticed there are only three signatures needed on the contract (coach, BOR rep, and AF Rep). The original contract only has the coaches signatures.

    There is also a clause (section 14) where the AF guarantees the payment if the University does not have sufficient funds or is prohibited by law to pay. I wonder if this will be looked at since the university has been removed as party in the case?
    I just found it on line and I can see where this could indeed be a clerical error issue.

    First contract signed in Jan 2016 references a 12-month term but refers to a Jun 2016 end date. A June end date would be peculiar, I'd think, but I recall Fritz's initial contract also had a June end date. Could be whoever drafted these didn't edit the end date along with all of the name/position/salary changes and it sailed through without anybody catching it, but that would be sloppy on the part of all parties.

    We may be guilty only of very sloppy attention to detail. Even more gray stuff for the court . . .

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12th November 2011, 10:15 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 7th October 2011, 01:47 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •