Court upholds ruling in O'Brien firing
Headline News
[##_1L|1044768302.jpg|width="130" height="90" alt=""|_##]A state appeals court has upheld a $2.5 million judgment awarded to former Ohio State University basketball coach Jim O'Brien over his 2004 firing. The Tenth District Court of Appeals ruled in an opinion issued Thursday that the Ohio Court of Claims rightfully decided in favor of O'Brien. The former coach had argued his concealment from the school of a personal loan he gave to a recruit in late 1998 did not warrant his dismissal. After the ruling, both parties appealed, OSU claiming the court erred in finding the former coach didn't materially breach his contract. The university added that additional instances of misconduct released by the NCAA in early 2006 should have barred O'Brien's claim altogether.
O'Brien also appealed the original ruling, claiming the court didn't properly calculate the amount of damages due and that OSU shouldn't have been able to reduce the sum because of bonus amounts they previously paid.
O'Brien was fired after he told former OSU Athletics Director Andy Geiger that he made the loan to the family of Aleksandar Radojevic, a prospect from Serbia. Radojevic never played for the Buckeyes, but O'Brien said he made the loan because his family was in financial straits following the death of Radojevic's father. Geiger reported the transaction to the NCAA in May 2004 and O'Brien was terminated in June, according to court documents.
The ruling that awarded O'Brien the judgment found that OSU's termination wasn't for a "material breach," defined as an act that defeats the entire purpose of the contract. The appeals court found that "NCAA compliance was but one of O'Brien's many duties."
The court added in its ruling that the stipulation in O'Brien's contract, approving termination for a material breach or NCAA violation, didn't allow OSU to determine a violation occured before the NCAA handed it down. The termination created "a 'bootstrapping effect' by allowing OSU to substitute its own judgment for that of the NCAA," the opinion stated.
The NCAA didn't issue an official ruling regarding O'Brien's violations until early 2006, and "even if it would have been proper to terminate him at that time, much of the liquidated damages awarded to O'Brien in the judgment of the trial court would have been earned as salary," the court said.
OSU is expected to issue a statement Thursday afternoon.
Related listings
-
Spector Judge to Withdraw Instruction
Headline News 09/20/2007[##_1L|1296038053.jpg|width="130" height="90" alt=""|_##]The deadlocked jury in the Phil Spector murder trial was asked to resume its deliberations after the judge yesterday said he would withdraw a legal instruction that jurors said was a stumbling ...
-
Lawyer in Plea Deal Was Edwards Bundler
Headline News 09/19/2007[##_1L|1078903174.jpg|width="130" height="130" alt=""|_##]Though his former law firm came under indictment more than a year ago and he himself appeared likely to face criminal charges, prominent trial lawyer William S. Lerach slipped past the vetting...
-
Lerach admits role in kickback scheme
Headline News 09/19/2007[##_1L|1386554067.jpg|width="120" height="101" alt=""|_##]William Lerach, the lead attorney in a New York-based law firm that lodged a $1 billion class-action against the CNMI industry, has pleaded guilty to a criminal indictment filed in Los Angeles...
New York Commercial Litigation Law Firm - Woods Lonergan PLLC
Founded in 1993 by Managing Partner James F. Woods, Woods Lonergan PLLC has built a strong reputation as a resourceful and industrious firm that provides clients with clear, concise, and straightforward answers to their most challenging legal issues. Partner Lawrence R. Lonergan, who joined the firm in 2008, has been a friend and colleague to Mr. Woods for over 40 years and shares the same business philosophy. Woods Lonergan PLLC’s collective experience and expertise enables the firm to expeditiously and effectively analyze the increasing challenges clients face in an evolving business and legal world, in many instances, avoiding unnecessary time and expense to our clients. Our mission is simple: provide cutting-edge expertise and sound advice in select areas of the law for corporate and business clients. We thrive on providing each client with personalized attention, forceful representation, and a collaborative team effort that embraces collective knowledge.