NHL Claims vs. ex-Coyotes owner tossed [by Bankruptcy Court, J Baum)

[XX]

Recent ruling in the NHL's lawsuit against Moyes

A federal bankruptcy court in Arizona threw out most of the National Hockey League’s claims against former Phoenix Coyotes owner Jerry Moyes for expenses associated with the team’s tenure in bankruptcy and NHL ownership.

The NHL initially sought to recover $145.9 million from Moyes, including $112.7 million in operational losses while the league ran the team and $6.5 million in unpaid salary for former coach Wayne Gretzky.

On Friday, Judge Redfield Baum ruled in a summary judgment that Moyes isn’t responsible for covering the tabs for the operational losses or for Gretzky’s salary.

Baum writes that he based part of his ruling on Moyes’ team-ownership agreement with the NHL, which says nothing about the possibility of Moyes paying the NHL’s bills to run the team in a post-bankruptcy scenario.

Baum ruled that he needs more information before deciding two remaining claims — the NHL is seeking $15.1 million in attorneys’ fees, and $11.6 million the league paid to unsecured creditors.

http://www.azcentral.com/community/glendale/articles/20131007claims-vs-ex-coyotes-owner-tossed.html

Click to read more...

 

[wunderpanda]

Good. The NHL needs to learn from the fiasco. It does make me want to put on the foil hat and speculate but that would quickly go off topic.

 

[Mungman]

Sniff, I miss Redfield, glad he gets (one of the) last words in this affair. He was the voice of sanity in this whole mess, if only people had heeded his advice back at the very beginning of this we'd be done and moved on years ago.

 

[htpwn]

Good.

The Coyotes' mess was all on the NHL (and partly on Glendale's absolute incompetence).

Moyes should not be held responsible for the league's scummy business practices.

 

[LadyStanley]

Moyes should not be held responsible for the league's scummy business practices.

But how much should he be held responsible for his own scummy business practices that precipitated the bankruptcy in the first place?


I do wonder if Gretzky will just write off the loss or seek other avenues of recouping his lost salary.

 

[cutchemist42]

Moyes tested what he could do legally and came pretty damn close to getting it if the CoG didn't tell the Judge they were siding with the NHL's plan.

The NHL tested what they could do and it was their own decisions that made them lose money after Moyes was settled.

Point is, Moyes had no business in the NHL, NHL approved him, and the CoG didn't work with him nearly as much they should have, considering what they did for the NHL years later

Case is closed, I just want to forgot the whole mess for awhile....

 

[GuelphStormer]

I am a bit confused by the statement, "The ruling, however, notes that NHL attorneys notified Baum that the league’s losses had been reduced by the team’s recent sale and that attorneys would file supplemental paperwork to report the precise amount of the NHL’s losses."

a) did IA buy debt (ie., past losses) when they bought the team?
b) Re: the "$112.7 million in operational losses while the league ran the team" ... does anyone know what time period that includes and does not include? did that $112.7M include losses incurred after the suit was filed? up until the day IA bought the team?

On the surface, $112.7M seems low, given the various paperwork filed by the NHL with Glendale over the years. Or, does that $112.7 omit the $50M ($45M? $25M?) it received from Glendale (thus avoiding double-dipping)?

 

[Fugu]

But how much should he be held responsible for his own scummy business practices that precipitated the bankruptcy in the first place?

Losing $200 MM or whatever that astronomical figure ended up being was accountability enough. The entire purpose to bankruptcy court is to stem the bleeding when a business is dead.

Furthermore, the NHL apparently did no better if their loss claim is accurate, mind you they had COG subsidizing to the tune of $25 MM-- something Moyes did NOT have.

I am a bit confused by the statement, "The ruling, however, notes that NHL attorneys notified Baum that the league’s losses had been reduced by the team’s recent sale and that attorneys would file supplemental paperwork to report the precise amount of the NHL’s losses."

a) did IA buy debt (ie., past losses) when they bought the team?
b) Re: the "$112.7 million in operational losses while the league ran the team" ... does anyone know what time period that includes and does not include? did that $112.7M include losses incurred after the suit was filed? up until the day IA bought the team?

On the surface, $112.7M seems low, given the various paperwork filed by the NHL with Glendale over the years. Or, does that $112.7 omit the $50M ($45M? $25M?) it received from Glendale (thus avoiding double-dipping)?

I had the same question. Maybe the NHL included the entire amount so that they could reimburse COG if they'd prevailed. Or those actually are just their losses, which would be very high indeed on top of the COG money.

 

[htpwn]

But how much should he be held responsible for his own scummy business practices that precipitated the bankruptcy in the first place?


I do wonder if Gretzky will just write off the loss or seek other avenues of recouping his lost salary.

Held responsible to who, though? The NHL?

I certainly did not mean to absolve Moyes of any of his own unhanded business practices, I just think that the bankruptcy and what resulted out of it was largely the league's fault.

They tried to push an owner out of his business, conspiring themselves to do what they're now deriding Moyes for doing (declaring bankruptcy to break the lease).

In a way, Moyes has already been held responsible. He took a big loss on the sale of the team itself, not to mention the losses accumulated through his years of running an NHL franchise in an unviable market.

 

[aqib]

I am a bit confused by the statement, "The ruling, however, notes that NHL attorneys notified Baum that the league’s losses had been reduced by the team’s recent sale and that attorneys would file supplemental paperwork to report the precise amount of the NHL’s losses."

a) did IA buy debt (ie., past losses) when they bought the team?
b) Re: the "$112.7 million in operational losses while the league ran the team" ... does anyone know what time period that includes and does not include? did that $112.7M include losses incurred after the suit was filed? up until the day IA bought the team?

On the surface, $112.7M seems low, given the various paperwork filed by the NHL with Glendale over the years. Or, does that $112.7 omit the $50M ($45M? $25M?) it received from Glendale (thus avoiding double-dipping)?

Whatever debt that existed pre-bankruptcy was addressed with the $140 million the NHL paid. Debts beyond that are SOL. The NHL agreed that any profits from the sale of the team (sale price - $140 million - losses) would go to paying leftover debt, most of which was Moyes and Gretzky. As for what Gretzky is owed, management employees are very low on the priority list in terms of who gets paid so he is also out of luck. He had his chance as a creditor to contest the case and chose not to.

 

[MarkhamNHL]

good news for other owners who want an exit strategy

 

[TheLegend]

This more or less brings an end to the BK case.

However I believe there's still the NHL's $60 million suit against Moyes that was separate to the BK filing. Hasn't been any word on that in a while though.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/coyotes/articles/20100308nhl-sues-jerry-moyes.html

 

[TheLegend]

But how much should he be held responsible for his own scummy business practices that precipitated the bankruptcy in the first place?


I do wonder if Gretzky will just write off the loss or seek other avenues of recouping his lost salary.

Moyes' Swift Aviation company is currently being sued by two separate entities.

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2013/10/02/jerry-moyes-swift-aviation-named-in.html

 

[Fugu]

This more or less brings an end to the BK case.

However I believe there's still the NHL's $60 million suit against Moyes that was separate to the BK filing. Hasn't been any word on that in a while though.

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/coyotes/articles/20100308nhl-sues-jerry-moyes.html

I think this was the original suit regarding the personal guarantee contract, which the NY court punted to J Baum's court, iirc.

 

[TheLegend]

I think this was the original suit regarding the personal guarantee contract, which the NY court punted to J Baum's court, iirc.

Could be.... I remember the venue being moved to AZ. But that was the last I'd read about it.

 

[mouser]

Unfortunately the article doesn't clarify if Baum ruled whether Moyes' personal guarantee with the NHL is valid and enforceable.

That's the one aspect I'm especially curious about as I'm willing to bet all the major sports leagues have personal guarantees signed with team owners.

 

[Fugu]

Unfortunately the article doesn't clarify if Baum ruled whether Moyes' personal guarantee with the NHL is valid and enforceable.

That's the one aspect I'm especially curious about as I'm willing to bet all the major sports leagues have personal guarantees signed with team owners.

From this portion (and it would be good to get more about what J Baum specifically wrote):

Baum writes that he based part of his ruling on Moyes’ team-ownership agreement with the NHL, which says nothing about the possibility of Moyes paying the NHL’s bills to run the team in a post-bankruptcy scenario.

Baum ruled that he needs more information before deciding two remaining claims — the NHL is seeking $15.1 million in attorneys’ fees, and $11.6 million the league paid to unsecured creditors.


​

As with some other discussions we've had about contract law, it seems the NHL's claim is going to be limited to what is specifically in that contract, and that they can show damage or liability if it's shown he was in breach of the contract. I'm fairly certain that bankruptcy law trumps anything in a contract about filing for bankruptcy.

I may be off, but I also thought someone mentioned the personal guarantee is $25 MM. Not sure what limits that places on other matters.

 

[Major4Boarding]

I think this was the original suit regarding the personal guarantee contract, which the NY court punted to J Baum's court, iirc.

Pretty sure you're correct.

 

[Major4Boarding]

Unfortunately the article doesn't clarify if Baum ruled whether Moyes' personal guarantee with the NHL is valid and enforceable.

That's the one aspect I'm especially curious about as I'm willing to bet all the major sports leagues have personal guarantees signed with team owners.

From this portion (and it would be good to get more about what J Baum specifically wrote):

Baum writes that he based part of his ruling on Moyes’ team-ownership agreement with the NHL, which says nothing about the possibility of Moyes paying the NHL’s bills to run the team in a post-bankruptcy scenario.

Baum ruled that he needs more information before deciding two remaining claims — the NHL is seeking $15.1 million in attorneys’ fees, and $11.6 million the league paid to unsecured creditors.

​

As with some other discussions we've had about contract law, it seems the NHL's claim is going to be limited to what is specifically in that contract, and that they can show damage or liability if it's shown he was in breach of the contract. I'm fairly certain that bankruptcy law trumps anything in a contract about filing for bankruptcy.

I may be off, but I also thought someone mentioned the personal guarantee is $25 MM. Not sure what limits that places on other matters.

42. The liability of the Moyes Parties under the Guaranty was capped at $30 million. In connection with the NHL's purchase of the Coyotes franchise, the NHL agreed to reduce that cap from $30 million to $15 million.

Did some digging in the archives and attached the .pdf.

Also see pages 8 thru 12

13. For the Moyes Parties' violations of the Consent Agreement, the NHL seeks an award of damages, presently estimated to be at least $30 million. For aiding and abetting the violations of the Coyotes' fiduciary duty to the NHL, the NHL seeks an award of compensatory damages against Jerry Moyes in the amount of at least $10 million, and punitive damages of $10 million for his malicious conduct. Moyes acted with knowledge of the NHL's rights and a delibertate intention to interfere with those rights. In addition, the NHL seeks to recover $11.6 million under the terms of the Guaranty that the Moyes Parties gave to the NHL and an additional amount of approximately $8 milliom, if it is determined that the Coyotes owe that amount to Wayne Gretzky, for the benefit of Mr. Gretzky.

 

[Ola]

15.1m in legal fees...

 

[Gnashville]

Maybe they can go after Slimebaldsilly next for his involvement in Moyes Bankruptcy antics.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

Glad Mr. Gretzky will get his money.

 

[mouser]

From this portion (and it would be good to get more about what J Baum specifically wrote):

Baum writes that he based part of his ruling on Moyes’ team-ownership agreement with the NHL, which says nothing about the possibility of Moyes paying the NHL’s bills to run the team in a post-bankruptcy scenario.

Baum ruled that he needs more information before deciding two remaining claims — the NHL is seeking $15.1 million in attorneys’ fees, and $11.6 million the league paid to unsecured creditors.


​

As with some other discussions we've had about contract law, it seems the NHL's claim is going to be limited to what is specifically in that contract, and that they can show damage or liability if it's shown he was in breach of the contract. I'm fairly certain that bankruptcy law trumps anything in a contract about filing for bankruptcy.

I may be off, but I also thought someone mentioned the personal guarantee is $25 MM. Not sure what limits that places on other matters.

I agree Moyes shouldn't be liable for operational loses post bankruptcy. But he did rack up debt with the NHL pre-bankruptcy. Plus the NHL did incur legal costs resulting from Moyes decisions independent from team operational costs. And Moyes himself never personally declared bankruptcy, so one would think that the bankruptcy court shouldn't have authority to void the personal guarantee.

I suspect the personal guarantee is probably still considered valid and that may be part of the justification if the NhL is ultimately awarded legal fees or other damages.

 

[Ernie]

Glad Mr. Gretzky will get his money.

Really? He did nothing to earn it.

 

[aqib]

Maybe they can go after Slimebaldsilly next for his involvement in Moyes Bankruptcy antics.

For what? Making a bid on a bankrupt asset? I could have walked into court and made a bid, if I wanted to. Sure he negotiated a deal with Moyes to buy the team once it was in bankruptcy but he didn't put the team in distress to begin with. If they weren't in distress they wouldn't have been allowed to file.