The Oakland Raiders, source of so many wonderful sagas of sports litigation (see here for another one), produced a new installment last week. The latest case concerns allegations that the team was duped into leaving Los Angeles based on mispresentations about season ticket sales made by the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum (OACC). The Raiders initially won a multimillion dollar jury verdict, although the award was far less than the amount sought. And, as reported here, in
a split opinion Friday, California's 3rd District Court of Appeal set aside a $34.2 million judgment that favored the football team, ruling that Davis and the Raiders gave up their right to sue for fraud when they reworked a 1995 lease agreement with the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum.The court expalins in its opinion, Oakland Raiders v. Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum, Inc., 2006 WL 3334402 (Cal. App. Nov. 17 2006):
California law has, for more than a century, recognized that a plaintiff claiming to have been induced into signing a contract by fraud or deceit is deemed to have waived a claim of damages arising therefrom if, after discovery of the alleged fraud, he enters into a new contract with the defendant regarding the same subject matter that supersedes the former agreement and confers upon him significant benefits.The court continued:
In this case, the Raiders admittedly discovered the falsity of the OACC's "sellout" representations regarding . . . ticket sales not later than the end of the 1995 football season. In 1996, without any mention of fraud, they negotiated and executed a new agreement concerning the same subject matter, which modified the rights of the parties, granted the Raiders significant benefits, and otherwise reaffirmed the validity and enforceability of the August 7 agreements. . . . [T]hese facts establish an implied waiver of the Raiders' claim for fraudulent inducement.The Raiders also lost out on a bid for attorney fees, which will likely cost the franchise another $10 to $20 million.
0 comments:
Post a Comment