You would be suing Grubb, who per the terms of the contract with UW is who actually owes a buyout should it take place. Normal course is that Grubb would negotiate something with Bama that they would cover the $2m upon signing. UW and Bama had no contract with each other.
Obviously. But when/if Bama hired Grubb, they'd contractually agree to pay his buyout. Just like they did for DeBoer. So then, did Bama actually ever hire Grubb? Or not? Or instead, were they having him pretend to be their OC when he really wasn't?
You and others have said that UW should sue Alabama, my point was that isn't who you would sue for lack of buyout money being paid. Suing Grubb is probably not be a good idea, even if you win.
You can sue Bama. Claims for tortious interference with a contract, tortious interference with business relationships, civil conspiracy would probably survive a motion to dismiss. You'd have to bring the lawsuit in the Supreme Court.
If he and Bama owe it, then they owe it. And if they officially hired him, they owe it. Grubb and Bama can decide who actually forks it over. Similar to car insurance... you sue the policy holder, but the insurance company pays.
Not how contract law works. As fosterworth pointed out, there are potentially other charges against Alabama for interference, etc. But Alabama has no direct liability for what is in Grubb's contract with UW. These are two seperate issues though.
This could already be moot if Dannen knowingly allowed this charade to take place. In which case he is an idiot for allowing Grubb to take part in poaching several players.
As soon as he posed as the OC at Alabama and they did not correct him they become culpable from a legal standpoint. They assume liability from that moment on ~ any judge would rule that way, especially as it relates to the fiduciary responsibility regarding the 30 day window to Bama kids that stayed or might have stayed as a consequence. Bama has no recourse but Washington does.
Comments
So when do we hear the news about UW getting the $2M buyout? Sue Bama if that is what it takes.
Grubb was recruiting for them, and introduced himself at their booster function as the OC. Bama needs to pay up.
You would be suing Grubb, who per the terms of the contract with UW is who actually owes a buyout should it take place. Normal course is that Grubb would negotiate something with Bama that they would cover the $2m upon signing. UW and Bama had no contract with each other.
Obviously. But when/if Bama hired Grubb, they'd contractually agree to pay his buyout. Just like they did for DeBoer. So then, did Bama actually ever hire Grubb? Or not? Or instead, were they having him pretend to be their OC when he really wasn't?
You and others have said that UW should sue Alabama, my point was that isn't who you would sue for lack of buyout money being paid. Suing Grubb is probably not be a good idea, even if you win.
You can sue Bama. Claims for tortious interference with a contract, tortious interference with business relationships, civil conspiracy would probably survive a motion to dismiss. You'd have to bring the lawsuit in the Supreme Court.
we already have 3 lawyers here.
If he and Bama owe it, then they owe it. And if they officially hired him, they owe it. Grubb and Bama can decide who actually forks it over. Similar to car insurance... you sue the policy holder, but the insurance company pays.
Not how contract law works. As fosterworth pointed out, there are potentially other charges against Alabama for interference, etc. But Alabama has no direct liability for what is in Grubb's contract with UW. These are two seperate issues though.
This could already be moot if Dannen knowingly allowed this charade to take place. In which case he is an idiot for allowing Grubb to take part in poaching several players.
As soon as he posed as the OC at Alabama and they did not correct him they become culpable from a legal standpoint. They assume liability from that moment on ~ any judge would rule that way, especially as it relates to the fiduciary responsibility regarding the 30 day window to Bama kids that stayed or might have stayed as a consequence. Bama has no recourse but Washington does.