Sports Law IPI - 03 - Contract Issues
LA Rams Fooball Club v. Cannon
Why Important? Shows judicial attitude toward athletes; explores contract
issues regarding identifying the offeror
Facts: Star college football player signed three sets of contracts (1 year each)
with a NFL team that had draft rights to him. Another team in competing AFL
contacts him and he sends a letter to original team saying he will not play for
them. Original team tries to get injunction to stop player from playing football
for anyone but them for the duration of the contract(s). Term that
commissioner must "confirm" signed contract made player offeror. Heavy
paternalism by judge in getting player out of contract. Probably should have
been enforced.
Rule(s): There is a duty to read terms of contract.
Courts should rely on the clear language of the contract when interpreting.
Sample v. Gotham Football Club
Why Important? Shows interpretation of contract duration in athlete's contract.
Facts: Player entered into a three-year contract by signing one-year contracts
for three separate years. There is a provision that if he gets hurt he gets paid
"during the term of this contract." Player claims "term of this contract" is the
whole three years. Team claims "term of this contract" is just the one-year
contract at the time of injury.
, Rule(s): Courts look at the clear language of the contract when interpreting.
NFL contract langauge subsequently altered to specify payment during
"season of injury."
University of Louisville v. Duke University
Why Important? Shows analysis for defining ambiguous contract terms in
sports setting
Facts: Duke signed contract to play Louisville a certain number of times. At
some point, they decided they didn't want to play against Louisville anymore.
Contract said if they didn't play the games, they would be subject to damages
if Louisville couldn't find replacement opponent of "similar stature." Duke was
worst team in country at time, how do we define "similar stature"?
Rule(s): Courts first look at the plain language of the contract. If a term is
ambiguous, then they may look outside the contract to industry standards to
define.
Taylor v. Wake Forest
Why Important? Shows that there is a contractual relationship between the
student and the university (Obligations of Student)
Facts: Student sued University for wrongful termination of football scholarship.
Financial aid policy said that scholarship could be terminated for refusal to
attend practice sessions/workouts. Student's grades had fallen below required
LA Rams Fooball Club v. Cannon
Why Important? Shows judicial attitude toward athletes; explores contract
issues regarding identifying the offeror
Facts: Star college football player signed three sets of contracts (1 year each)
with a NFL team that had draft rights to him. Another team in competing AFL
contacts him and he sends a letter to original team saying he will not play for
them. Original team tries to get injunction to stop player from playing football
for anyone but them for the duration of the contract(s). Term that
commissioner must "confirm" signed contract made player offeror. Heavy
paternalism by judge in getting player out of contract. Probably should have
been enforced.
Rule(s): There is a duty to read terms of contract.
Courts should rely on the clear language of the contract when interpreting.
Sample v. Gotham Football Club
Why Important? Shows interpretation of contract duration in athlete's contract.
Facts: Player entered into a three-year contract by signing one-year contracts
for three separate years. There is a provision that if he gets hurt he gets paid
"during the term of this contract." Player claims "term of this contract" is the
whole three years. Team claims "term of this contract" is just the one-year
contract at the time of injury.
, Rule(s): Courts look at the clear language of the contract when interpreting.
NFL contract langauge subsequently altered to specify payment during
"season of injury."
University of Louisville v. Duke University
Why Important? Shows analysis for defining ambiguous contract terms in
sports setting
Facts: Duke signed contract to play Louisville a certain number of times. At
some point, they decided they didn't want to play against Louisville anymore.
Contract said if they didn't play the games, they would be subject to damages
if Louisville couldn't find replacement opponent of "similar stature." Duke was
worst team in country at time, how do we define "similar stature"?
Rule(s): Courts first look at the plain language of the contract. If a term is
ambiguous, then they may look outside the contract to industry standards to
define.
Taylor v. Wake Forest
Why Important? Shows that there is a contractual relationship between the
student and the university (Obligations of Student)
Facts: Student sued University for wrongful termination of football scholarship.
Financial aid policy said that scholarship could be terminated for refusal to
attend practice sessions/workouts. Student's grades had fallen below required
