CSN

The article says it's worse than 20 Million. ATT would be assuming 19 Billion in debt.

 

They sent an email for free tickets again. Tried getting some for in the Crawford Boxes but when I get to the last page for putting in all my info it tells me there was a problem but doesn't specify what. POS

 

Same thing mine did. Thought it was my browser at first

 

Yeah, I've tried Chrome and IE so far. No luck.

 

Just figured out the workaround.

The problem on the Ticketmaster site seems to be with the "E-ticket" option. I just tried it after selecting Will Call instead and everything worked. Now, the bad news -- Will Call is certainly a pain. However, what you can do (and what I just did) after getting the Will Call confirmation is log into your Ticketmaster account, transfer the tickets to another email address of yours, and THEN select E-tickets. Worked for me, and I just printed them out.

It's a bit of a pain, but it seems to be working.

 

PW: CSN6JH9e

http://www.ticketmaster.com/event/0C004C3FC66E670E?did=csn

For whoever wants my 4 tickets (May 29th vs. Orioles)

 

http://blog.chron.com/ultimateastro...ost-of-cranes-lawsuit-against-comcast-mclane/

Bankruptcy judge to hear most of Crane’s lawsuit against Comcast, McLane

Posted on May 23, 2014 | By David Barron


U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Marvin Isgur says he has subject matter jurisdiction to hear almost all elements of Astros owner Jim Crane’s lawsuit against Comcast and former Astros owner Drayton McLane.

Isgur, in an opinion issued Thursday, said the only portion of the lawsuit that falls outside the bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction is a breach of contract allegation against McLane Champions, the company that owned the Astros before they were sold to Crane’s Houston Baseball Partners group in 2011.

The judge said he has authority to hear allegations of fraud, fraudulent inducement, fraud by nondisclosure, negligent misrepresentation and civil conspiracy against McLane, Comcast, NBC Universal and McLane Champions.

He said the breach of contract claim against McLane Champions will be returned to state court and that he will hold a June 23 hearing to determine whether additional causes of action or the entire complaint should be returned to state court.

Houston Baseball Partners filed suit against Comcast/NBC, McLane and McLane Champions last fall, alleging that the parties conspired to set a subscriber rate for Comcast SportsNet Houston that all parties knew was too high to be acceptable to providers. CSN Houston, which carries Astros and Rockets games, has been unable to reach carriage agreement across most of its five-state coverage area and has been under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection since February.

The Crane group’s suit initially was filed in state court but was moved to federal court by Comcast, which cited its relationship to the bankruptcy case. The Astros have appealed that decision to U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes, who has not ruled in the matter.

Separately, Isgur held a hearing earlier this spring to determine whether he had jurisdiction to hear the lawsuit if it remained in federal court. With Thursday’s ruling, he has determined that he does have subject matter jurisdiction to retain the case in all areas except the one count against McLane Champions.

Still in question, though, is whether the case will continue both in federal and state court or be returned entirely to state court, which will be the subject of the June 23 hearing.

Crane and his partners paid $615 million to purchase the Astros and McLane’s 46.5 percent share of the CSN Houston partnership. Crane said last year that the CSN Houston partnership accounted for $326 million of the purchase price.

 

I'm not sure I understand the advantage of having these claims tried in a piecemeal fashion in different courts. The same operative facts are in play generally for all of these claims.

 

My thought exactly. I don't see the merit in having the parties litigate this twice.

 

Odds are (from the comments we have seen from both judges in this case) is it likely won't go Crane's way in any court. For those just wanting this to be over, that lawsuit is a waste of time too.

 

That is why we have trials. You never know how a judge (or jury) will decide the case until all the evidence comes in.

 

Key difference is the lawsuit isn't preventing the parties from moving forward...the bankruptcy stay is.

 

I also feel the secondary lawsuit was filed "in response" to the Astros being strong-armed by the bankruptcy stay.

If that stay never gets filed, and the Astros are rightfully allowed to take back their media rights, they never file this suit.

 

I think you're right...they filed on the eve of the limitations period expiring...if they don't file, they lose the right to entirely on certain claims.

 

Which was all part of chess game that began when a partner began not looking out for the best interests of the Network. Negotiating in public, seeking deals outside the partnership, etc.

 

Yeah they could get a really naive jury if it got past a Judge that didn't refer to it a horse manure.

 

Judge Hughes expressed a different opinion that Crane even said amounted to muddying the waters.

 

Hughes is not hearing the lawsuit, so he can make whatever comments he would like. The fact is that you have not seen and heard all the evidence. Neither have I. Neither have Judge Hughes or Judge Isgur. That is why we have a litigation process. Once the discovery process is complete, it will be clear to the parties what the evidence is. If there is truly no evidence that supports the claims, I would expect that the defendants would file a motion to dismiss the suit.

It always amazes me when somebody makes definitive statements about the merits of a suit without the benefit of knowing all the evidence. When I was a newbie lawyer, a case hit my desk that I thought was complete garbage. Then I got took the depositions and knew my client was going to lose. I discussed settlement with him, but he wanted his day in court. He should have settled.

 

Good idea for those of us on both sides