Unfortunately..... Ive had the need to hire some serious Attorneys in my day and yes, if you can avoid D&D/Trial, thats what your aiming for. Most cases settled before it really hits the fan. This situation however, no matter what message Glendale sends IA & the NHL, far from over. Unless you believe in miracles, its not going to get any better however, I have hard time buying quite specifically Mayor Jerry's tough guy Clint Eastwood meets Ernest Hemingway act. This is a career politician, someone who feels beyond entitled to their entitlements and if that means the next generation is still paying for his large life, as in paying it forward, so be it. Jerry'll be dead. Why would he care? Dont matter when your dead. Just another head on the wall. His. Vanity project.
This is so true, Killion. The best lawyers are the ones that keep their clients out of court.
I could easily see the court issuing an interim injunction before the end of the summer, but after that I have a hard time imagining this case would ever go to trial.
If your information about the cancellation of depositions is correct, then it's probably a long-shot to have the interim motion heard either.
It's worth bearing in mind that any orders made so far have barely scratched the surface. It merely represents the court saying, "Let's pause and take a breath while we have time to make considered arguments based on admissible evidence as to what should happen while this case is waiting for trial." The motion this summer is just an interim step pending trial of the main action.
If the NHL has other plans that can be implemented for the 2015-16 season, it would make no sense to continue with the application for an interim injunction.
However, if the NHL needs to slow things down to put something in place for 2016-17, I'm pretty sure it would get all the assurances it needs to start and finish the 2016-17 season in Glendale, regardless of who has the upper hand on the eventual outcome of the lawsuit.
And, mind you, if IA fully intends to stay in the driver's seat and continue to operate the franchise in Glendale indefinitely, it would make the most sense to come to some kind of agreement with COG that resolves their differences. It's nearly impossible to do business on an ongoing basis when you're at war with an important business partner. It brings to mind my very first class of Commercial and Consumer Law in law school 35 years ago. The professor wrote in chalk on the board "Good businessmen don't sue each other." He then explained this at length to the effect that they will take a loss, see psychologists and do pretty much anything to avoid legal action because as long as the business relationship is ongoing it is almost always more valuable than the substance of the dispute. He said the exceptions are usually when the ongoing business relationship has already come to and then they can air their grievances in court to their heart's content, and then he said "That pretty much wraps up the commercial side of the course -- now let's talk about consumer-protection law!"
So, to my mind, the delay or termination of the proceedings would be an important but indecipherable signal. It could point to the sudden withdrawal of the Coyotes from the venue, or it could signal a mending of fences to foster an ongoing business relationship. From a legal standpoint, one is just as likely as the other.
