O'Day lawyers up

[Umista]

The two lawyers in my office have stated to me that both men have grounds for a suit. All of us will pay if UM does lose the suit. Lets wait and see how this plays out. Guilty in the press? I liked these two men and I hope I live to understand the absolute reason for the fire job!

I continue to worry about who will replace these two men. When will this occur? This can give us a summer to fight over the WHO????

 

[granitegriz]

You can bank money on what Umista just said...

 

[doebrmn]

For the very reasons stated, it is unlikely anyone will know exactly why the contracts were not renewed. Unless there is some smoking gun memo, UM (I am sure on the advice of counsel) will continue stating that they simply chose not to renew the contracts.

 

[Gametime]

The lawsuits by O'Day and Pflugrad will effectively end their respective careers. Potential short term gain, and with long term red flags to other potential employers. In my opinion, the fact that either would sue, rather than accept consequences for their own actions or in this case non-action, confirms exactly why they were let go. Neither one of them understand what they have done wrong, they still don't get it.

 

[Bear Axed]

When Robin goes to court on if he did or didn't have an oral contract extention for three more years?
Who will Milts 1st witness be? Jim O'Day maybe? Who else could have acted FOR the University of Montana at that time to offer that contract, but Jim?

 

[Hammer]

When Robin goes to court on if he did or didn't have an oral contract extention for three more years?
Who will Milts 1st witness be? Jim O'Day maybe? Who else could have acted FOR the University of Montana at that time to offer that contract, but Jim?

interesting info

 

[FARMDAWG]

When Robin goes to court on if he did or didn't have an oral contract extention for three more years?
Who will Milts 1st witness be? Jim O'Day maybe? Who else could have acted FOR the University of Montana at that time to offer that contract, but Jim?

Gametime, you're the one who doesn't get it! If you're so smart, you tell us what they did wrong? O'Day will have a job within a year, and Pflugrad will be somewhere before the start of season 2013!

 

[GrizPony]

Unfortunately, a verbal contract to enter a written contract argument is going to carry little weight. Otherwise, under your logic, if you tell a car dealer you want to buy a car and then back out the car dealer could sue you for the price of the car. So no, this does not create a cause of action. Now, if Phlu or O'day could show they were offered employment elsewhere and UM convinced them to stay by promising them a new deal, that may give rise to claim but there has been nothing published to indicate that those events occurred. Rather, based on published reports, it appears UM was coming up on the renewal period, events happened they didn't like so they simply told them they would not be entering into any new contracts with them. Assuming they are paid everything owed under the existing contract (which they will be because UM isn't going to do something stupid) and no other comments are made, case closed, Cliff Edwards or no Cliff Edwards. And for the records, Kramer's settlement wasn't viewed as a "win" by anyone. It simply was an acknowledgement that MSU would likely spend more money to bring the case through trial and Kramer was interesting in taking a coaching job. For Cliff, three years of work for 1/3 of $240k really isn't much of a pay day. As for Kramer, $160k for three years, could have likely made more coaching junior high football in California (that is being facetious), but considering costs associated with litigation, he likely would have made more money moving on and taking an Asst. coaching job somewhere.

You're wrong. Listen to Milt tonight on KPAX. His argument is that a contract of reliance was created in December. O'Day will be the first witness. Pflu relied on the promise of three more years of employment when he approached both new coaches and recruits. The next witnesses called will be the assistant coaches that relied on Pflu and O'Day's promises and moved their families here. Milt will then ice the cake by calling recruits and their families who will attest that Pflu and O'Day assured them that Pflu would be here for three years minimum. Leave the lawyering to the real lawyers. :thumb:

 

[goatcreekgriz]

Oral contracts that cannot be performed within a year are generally not enforceable. O'Day apparently is entitled to payment through 06/30/12 and Robin is apparently entitled to payment through 12/31/12.

 

[Bear Axed]

Oral contracts that cannot be performed within a year are generally not enforceable. O'Day apparently is entitled to payment through 06/30/12 and Robin is apparently entitled to payment through 12/31/12.

You may want to check MONTANA Codes annotated

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/..%5Cmca_toc%5Cindex.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

When you're done with that we'll look at a few case studies together!

Okie dokie?

 

[goatcreekgriz]

MCA 28-2-903(a), but most simply call it the Statute of Frauds. Okey, dokey, smokey, or do I need to fire up Westlaw?

 

[Gametime]

When Robin goes to court on if he did or didn't have an oral contract extention for three more years?
Who will Milts 1st witness be? Jim O'Day maybe? Who else could have acted FOR the University of Montana at that time to offer that contract, but Jim?

Gametime, you're the one who doesn't get it! If you're so smart, you tell us what they did wrong? O'Day will have a job within a year, and Pflugrad will be somewhere before the start of season 2013!

1. They do nothing (other than a one quarter suspension) to Kemp and Johnson when they have confrontation with police and subsequent charges;

2. 2010 rape allegations against players, they do nothing to discipline players;

3. 2011 rape allegations against players, during season, they do nothing to discipline players;

4. 2012 rape allegation against Johnson. They suspend, then reinstate Johnson despite civil agreement for him to stay 1500 feet away from alleged victim, then publicly proclaim his great character and leadership skills.

They created a culture of acceptance to unacceptable behavior whether criminal or not. There are lots of things that people do that may or may not rise to the level of criminal conduct, but just isn't the way people should behave. And if they do there should be consequences. They were like the parent with no discipline with their kids. Eventually the kids are out of control, and that my friend it's exactly what happened with the players.

 

[GrizPony]

What do you think of Milt's angle of a arguing that a contract of reliance exists?

 

[GrizPony]

When Robin goes to court on if he did or didn't have an oral contract extention for three more years?
Who will Milts 1st witness be? Jim O'Day maybe? Who else could have acted FOR the University of Montana at that time to offer that contract, but Jim?

Gametime, you're the one who doesn't get it! If you're so smart, you tell us what they did wrong? O'Day will have a job within a year, and Pflugrad will be somewhere before the start of season 2013!

1. They do nothing (other than a one quarter suspension) to Kemp and Johnson when they have confrontation with police and subsequent charges;

2. 2010 rape allegations against players, they do nothing to discipline players;

3. 2011 rape allegations against players, during season, they do nothing to discipline players;

4. 2012 rape allegation against Johnson. They suspend, then reinstate Johnson despite civil agreement for him to stay 1500 feet away from alleged victim, then publicly proclaim his great character and leadership skills.

They created a culture of acceptance to unacceptable behavior whether criminal or not. There are lots of things that people do that may or may not rise to the level of criminal conduct, but just isn't the way people should behave. And if they do there should be consequences. They were like the parent with no discipline with their kids. Eventually the kids are out of control, and that my friend it's exactly what happened with the players.

I think you might rethink your post regarding JJ in the near future. Just saying.

 

[goatcreekgriz]

CG: As I said, generally not enforceable, but it depends on a lot of things and reliance has to be reasonable. You're talking estoppel. If you have a course of dealing involving three-year written contracts, it's a tough climb. Not impossible. I'll call you tomorrow, and thanks for the info and pic yesterday,

 

[Gametime]

When Robin goes to court on if he did or didn't have an oral contract extention for three more years?
Who will Milts 1st witness be? Jim O'Day maybe? Who else could have acted FOR the University of Montana at that time to offer that contract, but Jim?

Gametime, you're the one who doesn't get it! If you're so smart, you tell us what they did wrong? O'Day will have a job within a year, and Pflugrad will be somewhere before the start of season 2013!

1. They do nothing (other than a one quarter suspension) to Kemp and Johnson when they have confrontation with police and subsequent charges;

2. 2010 rape allegations against players, they do nothing to discipline players;

3. 2011 rape allegations against players, during season, they do nothing to discipline players;

4. 2012 rape allegation against Johnson. They suspend, then reinstate Johnson despite civil agreement for him to stay 1500 feet away from alleged victim, then publicly proclaim his great character and leadership skills.

They created a culture of acceptance to unacceptable behavior whether criminal or not. There are lots of things that people do that may or may not rise to the level of criminal conduct, but just isn't the way people should behave. And if they do there should be consequences. They were like the parent with no discipline with their kids. Eventually the kids are out of control, and that my friend it's exactly what happened with the players.

I think you might rethink your post regarding JJ in the near future. Just saying.

Why would I "rethink" my post. I didn't say he did anything wrong. I said it was alleged to have occurred. I hope none of the players get charged and in fact did nothing wrong. The problem is until it has been determined they should have either held him out of Spring practice or shut their mouths once he was reinstated.

 

[PlayerRep]

From Fritz Neigbhor via twitter:

Recently fired #Griz AD Jim O'Day has retained the law firm Edwards (as in Cliff), Frickle and Culver. Interesting.

Unless I'm mistaken, the same lawyer who won Kramer a fat settlement from MSU.

Engstrom is going to wishing he could unring the bell before this is over.

Yup, you are correct.

 

[spsyk]

The fact that nobody has said a peep about the reasons for the firing, and nobody has made any derogatory comments about either fired person in the aftermath of all of this probably is quite upsetting to Edwards. UM seems to have learned from MSU's experience and given Edwards absolutely nothing to work with.

I think this is exactly correct. Kramer had a contract that said he could be fired "without cause." MSU then fired him, but instead of keeping their mouth shut they held a press conference stating they fired him becasue ___________. MSU paid Kramer a settlement not because they fired him, but because the gave reasons for firing him that slandered his reputation.

I'm pretty sure O'Day and Pflu's contracts also said they can be dismissed without cause, and they were. If UM actually learned anything from MSU's situation, UM will not be giving any further reasons for the dismissals.

It won't take much of an attorney to get past that lack of a stated reason. There are too many accolades for both Jim and Robin to say they were fired for any other reasons than some bad press in regard to players. Success in the classroom and on the field. Jim is one of the most respected ADs in the country. Success everywhere but in the press. I really feel the action were a bit knee jerk. Not enough facts have come out. JJ was not charged etc. And I just heard a confession of sorts from my nephew I had never heard until last night that made me give this more thought.

My nephew had sex with some girl over a couple of day period and then abruptly stopped the relationship mostly because the first girl was already talking of living together etc. and my nephew was already sort of dating another girl that lived out of town. Obviously my nephew was not a saint. The first girl realized she was not on his radar anymore decided she had been raped. My understanding is the so called victim started a rumor about being raped by John with a couple of friends. Some girl that my nephew did not know was there and became over the top pissed and she decided the law needed to be involved. Luckily for my nephew there was another girl that was listening that knew both parties and she stepped forward and confronted the first girl with this statement "Weren't you talking about having sex with John before you actually went out with him." The first girl finally admitted that she had really been hurt by my nephews actions and wanted to get back at him. So the truth came out just before law officials could have become involved, but if the girl that knew both parties had not been in the room, this could have been a different story. I am not saying this is what happened with JJ, but something like this is possible. Bottom line, I do not believe there has been enough time for the entire truth to come out.

The contributing reason for firing the head coach, was that he was able to attain coach of the year in his second year of a three year contract, the the AD for hiring him.

 

[doebrmn]

Now, if Phlu or O'day could show they were offered employment elsewhere and UM convinced them to stay by promising them a new deal, that may give rise to claim but there has been nothing published to indicate that those events occurred.

Crack, perhaps you should simply learn to read. What exactly about the above quote don't you understand as it directly relates to a claim of detrimental reliance. For future reference, you would be wise to leave the lawyering to a real lawyer.

 

[PlayerRep]

Cliff will do fine job for O'Day, but rest assured the decision by Engstrom was not made in haste. The Kramer settlement basically covered lost wages (before attorney fess were deducted) for the time Kramer was out of work. Not a bad job by his counsel, but not a big haul by anyone. It in unlikely that any lawsuit has real legs.

The decision was made in haste, without consulting even his main senior VP, Jim Foley. Foley apparently supports O'Day.