A couple of minor legal matters, for what they are worth.
nattysez said:
I expect MLB would ignore the appeal to the federal courts and proceed with the suspension UNLESS Slappy's attorneys can get a preliminary injunction against the league preventing the enforcement of the suspension. A preliminary injunction requires evidence that if whatever's happening is not stopped, the injured party will suffer damages that are not compensable with money. So Slappy would have to argue that if he is wrongfully suspended, his inability to play and therefore keep moving toward some all-time records would create a harm not compensable by money. He'd also, of course, have to demonstrate a likelihood of winning his suit on the merits. I'd give that about a 10% chance of happening. So long story short, his federal court appeal will likely result in nothing and MLB will enforce the suspension as soon as the arbitrator rules.
So, when deciding whether there's irreparable injury for purposes of deciding whether to issue a stay, you assume that the plaintiff has a good case. In other words, you ask, "if plaintiff proves his case, would the injury alleged be irreparable." If I were a judge, I would find irreparable injury here. It's more than about records -- it's a unique career that is limited in duration in a way that I do not think is compensable with money. Also, I would be mindful of the fact that it's hard for MLB to claim it is suffering irreparable injury on the other end -- the suspension can be served in the future and MLB's own rules permit players who have been suspended to play so they can't really make a very strong argument that it harms baseball for suspended players to be allowed to play. All that said, based on what I know now, it seems likelihood of success on the merits is pretty weak, so I still think an injunction or stay is a tough sell.
glennhoffmania said:
What are the consequences if he violates the confidentiality agreement and releases all of the evidence?
I continue to enjoy this show immensely. Don't give up the good fight, Alex.
If it's just an agreement between the two sides, then breach of the agreement is a breach of a contract. He would likely be subject to damages, though proving them might be tough. If KFC was involved in litigation and produced the seven secret spices pursuant to a confidentiality agreement, I would expect the damages for a breach would be considerable. It's not as clear here, without knowing what the documents are. Sometimes, confidentiality agreements are not merely agreed upon by the parties, but also approved by the tribunal (here, the arbitrator) and turned into "orders." In court, this would mean that a deliberate violation of the confidentiality order would mean sanctions and contempt. Arbitrators, though, don't usually have contempt power or a means to enforce it. If you refuse a judge's order, the judge can have a bench warrant issued and have you thrown in the pokey. Arbitrators can't do that. They can, though, in some circumstances take a deliberate violation of a court order into account in making their decision on the merits. I don't think that would happen here. Gives A-Rod an issue to argue about in federal court that he might not otherwise have. One other consequence of violating a confidentiality agreement or order, is that it probably frees the other side up to do the same -- in other words, if A-Rod produced confidential documents as part of the same or a related agreement, if he violates it, MLB could reasonably reveal his documents to counter any negative consequences of A-Rod's disclosure.
The legal team's strategy here is interesting. The seem to be almost daring MLB to sue them. The really seem to think that the threat of depositions will bring MLB to the table or give A-Rod a face-saving way out of this. I think they realize that litigation over a challenge to the arbitrator's award is not likely to get that far -- it probably will be resolved on the papers before there is any testimony. But if they can induce MLB to sue, they are going to get a shot at them most likely. Between alleging 150k payouts for witness testimony and threatening a blatant violation of a confidentiality order, A-Rod's team at least is posturing this as if to say, "we know you're too scared of your dirty laundry to bring a claim." I really can't believe this is where they want to go. I think their client has a whole lot more to fear by being put under oath than MLB does. I think they are playing a game of chicken and will have to swerve if MLB doesn't do so first.
