IF any of these allegations by Donoghy turn out to be true is there anyway the players/coaches/teams involved in the examples he pointed out sue the league? For example game 6, Bibby, Divac, Webber, Peja, Adeleman etc more than likely would have had a ring in 2002 instead of being known as 'chokers' down the stretch. Never mind all the financial gain from winning a ring, but their legacy as a player/coach was at stake. in contrast shaq/kobe/phil etc legacy's was greatened because of it all. granted the kings lost a winnable game 7 at home and lakers fans will all point to that but given that it should have never even gotten to that game 7 without some (to put it nicely) suspect officiating in game 6. so if any of these things are true can players sue the league for an unfair situation?
I would expect you probably could, but I doubt any of those players/coaches would even if these accusations gain more proof. Smaller role players that didn't make high salaries might though. They would build their case based on them getting a higher salary or tendered more offers if they had chamionship experience.
I think there's a high likelihood that player contracts include clauses in them to prevent lawsuits against the league. To keep them from suing for personal injury would be a big one, but I would suspect that it's general enough to keep them from suing on these (Donaghy) grounds as well. Evan
if all these allegations turn out to be true, i would if i were bibby, divac or webber. it is the ring that i've pursued all my life, why wouldn't i sue if someone illegally takes the game away?
ive never thought of it that way, but i wonder if JVG can get his money back. He should at least get an apology from Stern
Guys, I'm a lawyer and heaven't read contracts that individual players sign under the CBA or that franchise owners sign with the NBA. Even if there is a clause under a player or franchise contract that prevents lawsuits from being filed for these types of things, there's usually an arbitration clause that allows 1-3 arbitrators decide the case out of court. So whether you are talking about arbitration (might be the case in a suit against the league) or a lawsuit (probable against a rogue referee), you gotta have a few things in your pocket to prevail. Against the league - you need to prove knowledge of the problem and calloused indifference to solving it in order to even have a claim. This is because there's no evidence that the referee acted in concert or with the approval of the NBA. Against the referee, I'm inclined to say that the right to sue him is obvious, but you can't get blood out of a turnip, and what the referee did was not in the course and scope of his employment (gambling and fixing games aren't part of his job description), so the NBA can't be stuck for what one of it's referees did. Against the league and the referee - you still gotta prove damages. You don't have to prove that you would have won the NBA championship, but you have to prove at least that you were deprived of the chance. That's not really that easy to do. As for reputation, do you think Jon Barry's reputation is any less after Finley stole that ball from out of bounds that it was before that call wasn't made? Any idiot with a piece of paper and a pen can file a lawsuit, but that doesn't mean that they should. If it's justice you seek, I'd like the referee to be sent to a California prison to spend 20 years in the sexual predator wing along with a bunch of Kings fans.
