Sports Law Blog |
All things legal relating to the sports world... |
|
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Tennessee Titans sue USC and Lane Kiffin for Inducement of Breach of Contract and Tortious Interference Marcia Smith of the Orange County Register has the story on the lawsuit and interviews me and Lewis & Clark Law School professor Tung Yin about it.The gist of the lawsuit: the Titans allege that USC and its new coach, Lane Kiffin, "maliciously" lured away running backs coach Kennedy Pola to become the Trojans' offensive coordinator. The alleged malicious part is that Pola's contract with the Titans required written permission from both the Titans team president and its general counsel for him to take another job. He didn't get the permission, and the Titans claim USC and Kiffin knew about the permission requirement. Now the Titans don't have a running backs coach with a week to go before training cap. Here is an excerpt from Smith's story: To read the rest of Smith's column, click here. To read the complaint, click here. I have 5 other points: 1) I think it would be interesting to find out how common the alleged clause requiring Pola to obtain written permission is in the contracts of Titans' assistant coaches and, if it is common, whether the team has enforced it with other departing coaches. Or, if its unique to Pola's contract, why did the team insist on having it with him? 2) Although the facts of this case are different, there was the recent case in New York involving James Madison University engaging in tortious interference by hiring away basketball coach Matt Brady from Marist College without obtaining the proper permission from Marist. Marist won the case. While that case is in a different jurisdiction, does not concern a position promotion (as Pola, now an offensive coordinator as opposed to mere running backs coach, is getting with USC), and probably involves different contractual language, perhaps the Titans nonetheless feel emboldened by the outcome of that case. 3) I assume Pola isn't being sued himself for breach of contract because the Titans do not believe it is financially worth it, or because they still like him as a person, or because they do not want to develop a reputation for suing departing employees who leave the team for a promotion. 4) While this lawsuit is unlikely to prevail, the Titans are sending a message that other teams probably agree with: don't poach coaches right before the start of training camp. 5) If this dispute were between the Titans and another NFL team, rather than with a college team, we wouldn't see a lawsuit -- we'd see Commissioner Goodell resolve it, internally (like when Commissioner Tagliabue resolved the dispute between the Jets and Patriots when the latter hired Bill Belichick away -- the Jets got a first round pick, the Patriots got what turned out to be one of the best coaches of all time). 11 Comments:
Will Pola be staying with the Titans even though he has obviously abused their trust?
Thanks, Ciano. I agree that the Titans probably feel like Pola breached their trust (especially with training camp about to start), but I can't see Pola returning to the Titans.
3 thoughts: 1) This is different than Brady because there is no luring of recruits away like he did; 2)Even if the Titans demonstrate all the elements of this tort, what are their damages? Seriously--NONE; 3) Could this REALLY be a way to simply smear Kiffin for what he did to Vols by finding that opportunity to go after him?
Thanks, Anonymous.
Yes, assuming they can prove a competitive disadvantage and then put a dollar number to it, you would be correct if it is liberally interpreted (and thanks for pointing that out). As far as the smear, it's not the Titans who care: it's the lawyers who brought the suit (Tennessee alumni)who are bringing that into the fold out of spite but are couching it as a point of similarity to show "pattern." Remember we are talking about the rabid, foaming at the mouth SEC fans here who still feel betrayed by their former "messiah."
All good points, Anonymous, thanks. The subtext to this lawsuit is pretty intriguing.
You are welcome! I'm confident that you are well-versed on the legal issues here, I'm just pointing out that there's more to this story than just law :)
To add to the "smear" possibility: Paragraph 18 details Kiffin's stint as head coach at UT, his jumping to USC, and his taking several UT assistants with him, all as showing a course and pattern of conduct of interfering with assistants' contracts.
Yes. This past week you guys have all kinds of exam questions: civ pro (Kiffin); intentional interference with a contract (Kiffin); agency (Kansas State, USC/Bush); breach of contract (Marist); title ix/employment (Quinnipiac)...its out of control!
Question for Howard (has nothing to do with this post): Do you know much about the constitutional issues related to college coaches at public universities who decide to exclude the "press" from watching or reporting? If state university has a football team, for example, can the coach legally exclude the press from attending the practice? Sorry about asking here, but just a thought...
Random thought, I apologize if this has been mentioned: Jeff Fisher (head coach of Titans) is a USC alum...
|