HHP: MASN/Nats/Orioles case (Inside the Courtroom)

[Frobby]

The Nationals better settle. Before they are before the Supreme Court

I can predict with some confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will never take this case. They hear less than 100 cases a year out of many thousands that they consider, and this case would not interest them.

By the way, in the crazy New York judicial system, the trial court (where Justice Marks sits) is called the Supreme Court. So this case already reached the Supreme Court in NY. There are two levels of appeal. The first is called the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, and the second level is called the New York Court of Appeals. Go figure.

I wish I had some good intel on how long it will take for the Appellate Division to decide the first-level appeal. The last I heard, it was possible that the matter would be argued in September or October, but at this point, I think September is out the window because appellate briefs haven't been filed yet (opening briefs have to be filed 8 weeks before the argument notice date, and the notice date is usually the first Tuesday of a month). And once the case is argued it can be many months before a decision comes down.

[BohKnowsBmore]

I can predict with some confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will never take this case. They hear less than 100 cases a year out of many thousands that they consider, and this case would not interest them.

By the way, in the crazy New York judicial system, the trial court (where Justice Marks sits) is called the Supreme Court. So this case already reached the Supreme Court in NY. There are two levels of appeal. The first is called the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, and the second level is called the New York Court of Appeals. Go figure.

I wish I had some good intel on how long it will take for the Appellate Division to decide the first-level appeal. The last I heard, it was possible that the matter would be argued in September or October, but at this point, I think September is out the window because appellate briefs haven't been filed yet (opening briefs have to be filed 8 weeks before the argument notice date, and the notice date is usually the first Tuesday of a month). And once the case is argued it can be many months before a decision comes down.

Right. There doesn't seem to be any far reaching impact that would make this of interest to the SCOTUS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[weams]

Right. There doesn't seem to be any far reaching impact that would make this of interest to the SCOTUS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I figured that the MLB aspect and internal collusions might push the appeals process to an Anti-Trust discussion. But I am no attorney. I've been right on some parts of this so far. I think I'll keep shooting.

[Frobby]

I figured that the MLB aspect and internal collusions might push the appeals process to an Anti-Trust discussion. But I am no attorney. I've been right on some parts of this so far. I think I'll keep shooting.

You have been right on many things, but you're way off base on this one.

[weams]

You have been right on many things, but you're way off base on this one.

I can accept that!

[MdSooner]

I can accept that!

I am not rich or have much money

But 2 MLB teams and owners fighting over money is just dumb to me

Settle your differences How much cash can a few million a year make in the grand scheme of things?

I just don't get it. How much money do you really need?

[Frobby]

I am not rich or have much money

But 2 MLB teams and owners fighting over money is just dumb to me

Settle your differences How much cash can a few million a year make in the grand scheme of things?

I just don't get it. How much money do you really need?

Not many rich people think that way. The team runs on a budget, and a few million more or less can mean signing a player or not. And there is a lot of money involved here -- the difference between what the MASN wanted and what the arbitrators decided is about $25-30 mm/yr. And what the Nats wanted was about $60 mm/yr more than what the arbitrators gave them.

[BohKnowsBmore]

I figured that the MLB aspect and internal collusions might push the appeals process to an Anti-Trust discussion. But I am no attorney. I've been right on some parts of this so far. I think I'll keep shooting.

Ultimately, they enjoy their ATE at the behest of congress. Not sure the Supreme Court would look to get involved.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spiritof66]

This is not a well reasoned decision. Justice Marks (or his clerk) either doesn't understand what's going on or has decided that the Nats/MLB are the bad guys and pressure should be applied to them in order to get this mess resolved. Either way, I'll take it.

I have been a former (that is, retired) New York lawyer for over three years. The conventional wisdom used to be that an appeal to the First Department (where MASN's appeal is pending) typically takes, in the absence of unusual delay or procedural complexity, about 18 months from appeal to decision. In many cases, the First Department has pretty much decided the case before the oral argument and the decision is handed down within a few weeks after that. I'll try to get better information tomorrow on how long the appeal is likely to take.

[weams]

Yup. NEVER bet against Angelos in court proceedings. You'd think MLB and the Nationals would've figured that out by now.

http://camdendepot.blogspot.com/2016/07/justice-marks-opts-not-to-send-case.html

A waste of six months by the Nationals again.

[Frobby]

http://camdendepot.blogspot.com/2016/07/justice-marks-opts-not-to-send-case.html

A waste of six months by the Nationals again.

No, not really. I don't believe these skirmishes have had any impact on the timing of the appeal.

Besides that, what do you mean "again?" It has been MASN that has been slowing the process down, successfully, as part of its strategy.

[weams]

No, not really. I don't believe these skirmishes have had any impact on the timing of the appeal.

Besides that, what do you mean "again?" It has been MASN that has been slowing the process down, successfully, as part of its strategy.

I think they should just settle. That is what the again means to me.

[weams]

http://camdendepot.blogspot.com/2016/07/justice-marks-opts-not-to-send-case.html

A waste of six months by the Nationals again.

Manfred has continued to make outrageously biased comments in favor of the Nationals. The Commissioner stated that “It is important to bear in mind the fundamentals. The fundamentals are that the Orioles agreed the RSDC would set the rights fees for MASN and the Orioles every five years. The Orioles have engaged in a pattern of conduct designed to avoid that agreement being effectuated.” Manfred has further argued that “We are intent on making sure that the agreement that gets the Nationals a fair market value for their TV rights is enforced, and we’ll do whatever is necessary to get that.” Yet, Manfred refused to acknowledge that the agreement was also vacated due to evident partiality and therefore that the panel was biased towards the Nationals. It is obviously unreasonable to claim that MASN is at fault for fighting against a decision found to be unfairly biased against them. As this case continues to progress, Manfred is further demonstrating his anti-MASN bias and thereby ruining his credibility. The appellate court will have to wonder if the RSDC is independent enough from the Commissioner to make a fair ruling. The longer MASN is able to delay a final decision, the higher the likelihood that Manfred will make a significant error which proves that the RSDC is an unsuitable arbitrator for this dispute.

The Commissioner is quite firm in his stance at this point.

[Frobby]

I think they should just settle. That is what the again means to me.

Well, I agree with that. But who knows what settlement positions either side has taken since the RSDC decision came down? It's obvious MASN isn't going to settle unless the number is substantially less than what the RSDC came up with, but if they are adamantly sticking to the "Bortz number" they submitted to the RSDC, I don't see the Nats just accepting that.

[weams]

Well, I agree with that. But who knows what settlement positions either side has taken since the RSDC decision came down? It's obvious MASN isn't going to settle unless the number is substantially less than what the RSDC came up with, but if they are adamantly sticking to the "Bortz number" they submitted to the RSDC, I don't see the Nats just accepting that.

Anyway, I am out of my area of any competence when commenting on the legal aspects of any of this. I am happy that MASN/Orioles continue to have their way in the legal arena considering the incredible resources that the opposing side can bring to bear.