[外電] 經營權爭端簡表

看板Hawks作者sssfrost (神遊物外)時間17年前 (2007/10/03 11:03)推噓0(0推 0噓 0→)

留言0則, 0人參與討論串1/1

先貼上來，給日後想研究者有個參考。 Timeline for Spirit ownership case By TIM TUCKER The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Published on: 09/11/07 THE STORY SO FAR Hawks-Thrashers ownership group Atlanta Spirit has been tangled in a legal quagmire for more than two years. A replay of the twists and turns: -- July 30, 2005: The feud erupts when part-owner Steve Belkin makes it clear that he plans to use his power as the Hawks' NBA governor to block a proposed trade with the Phoenix Suns for guard Joe Johnson. Belkin contends the Hawks would be giving up too much. The other owners back the trade. The NBA requires each team's governor to sign off on trades. -- July 31, 2005: Part-owner Michael Gearon Jr. warns Belkin in an e-mail that the Hawks intend to go through with the trade and "if you take any action as NBA governor to interfere ... you will be removed." -- Aug. 4, 2005: Belkin gets a restraining order against his fellow owners — Michael Gearon Sr., Michael Gearon Jr., Bruce Levenson, Ed Peskowitz, Rutherford Seydel, Todd Foreman and Beau Turner — from a Boston court, temporarily prohibiting them from removing him as governor. -- Aug. 6, 2005: Gearon Sr. says the central issue is Belkin's desire to operate the teams "on the cheap." Belkin denies this. -- Aug. 9, 2005: Before a court hearing, Hawks general manager Billy Knight famously refuses to shake Belkin's hand. The Boston court issues a preliminary injunction that prohibits the other owners from removing Belkin as governor. -- Aug. 11, 2005: NBA commissioner David Stern files an affidavit saying Belkin's partners have grounds to remove him and that Stern would approve the action. -- Aug. 12, 2005: After considering Stern's affidavit, the Boston court lifts the injunction and says the other owners can remove Belkin as governor with five business days' notice. -- Aug. 19, 2005: On the day the other owners are free to remove him as governor, Belkin resigns the position and signs a contract to sell his 30 percent stake in the Hawks, Thrashers and Philips Arena to his partners for a price to be set by a series of up to three appraisals. The Hawks immediately complete the Johnson trade. -- Nov. 23, 2005: The first appraisal report is completed. Citigroup Private Bank values Belkin's 30 percent stake at $88 million. Belkin files a new lawsuit against his partners in Montgomery County (Md.) Circuit Court, alleging "a concerted campaign . . . to pay substantially less than fair market value" for his stake. In subsequent court filings, Belkin calls the Citigroup appraisal "grossly undervalued" and the other owners, noting Belkin's $11.7 million investment, call it "breathtakingly generous." -- Dec. 2005-Feb. 2006: A series of court filings reveal a buyout process in disarray. Belkin claims he has the right to select the second appraiser because he objected fastest to the results of the first — one minute after receiving the report. The other owners claim they have the right to select the second appraiser because Belkin hired the first and objected to its results before they received the report. (The August 2005 contract doesn't say who is entitled to pick the second appraiser if both sides object to the first.) Belkin proceeds to hire a second appraiser, J. P. Morgan Securities, which values his stake at $140 million. The other owners say the J. P. Morgan appraisal is invalid because of the unresolved dispute over Belkin's right to choose the appraiser. -- Feb. 24, 2006: Montgomery County (Md.) Circuit Court Judge Eric Johnson rules that Belkin unambiguously had the right to choose the second appraiser because he objected fastest to the results of the first. -- March 2006: More court filings. Belkin argues that the logical extension of the Feb. 24 ruling is that his partners missed deadlines to pay him the amount of the second appraisal (or to seek a third appraisal) and that he thus he is entitled, under the August 2005 contract, to buy them out at cost. The other side counters that Belkin's "audacious" scenario "would result in nothing less than judicially sanctioned theft" of the teams. -- June 14, 2006: Johnson rules that Belkin is, indeed, entitled to buy out his partners at cost. The other owners vow to appeal. -- July 6, 2006: Johnson issues a stay of his ruling while it is appealed. -- July 11, 2006: As a condition of the stay, the feuding owners agree that the Hawks and Thrashers will not sign players to contracts of longer than four years during the appeals process. -- March 2, 2007: A three-judge panel of Maryland's Court of Special Appeals hears arguments in the case. Baltimore attorney James Shea, representing the non-Belkin owners, argues that Johnson's rulings should be reversed because, among other reasons, they were made without benefit of a full trial or full discovery to sort out material factual disputes. In their questioning of attorneys, the appellate judges probe possible ambiguities in the August 2005 buyout contract and possible inconsistencies in the appraisal process. -- Sept. 11, 2007: The Maryland Court of Special Appeals reversed the circuit court's rulings of Feb. 24, 2006, and June 14, 2006. 資料來源 http://www.ajc.com/hawks/content/sports/hawks/stories/2007/09/11/ spirittime_0912.html -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.230.34.213 ※ 編輯: sssfrost 來自: 61.230.34.213 (10/03 11:03)