If Jamie McCourt signed a legal document that was later "modified" by an attorney working for her husband, giving him ownership of the team, then the judge did the right thing. Now hopefully, they will do the right thing and sell the team. And why was it necessary to make nasty remarks about her apperance?
Evan - 13 years ago
Once that attorney testified that he swapped out a page to change what Jamie had signed off on and didn't bring it to her for approval the agreement was void because there hadn't been a mutual agreement to a material term. That is first year of law school contracts law. I hope they sell to a local owner who doesn't manage them like the Clippers.
Kat - 13 years ago
Neither, actually. The best thing for the Dodgers is for someone to buy the team.
Stuart Fujisaki - 13 years ago
The judge ruling in favor of Jamie McCourt is a victory for all Dodger fans. This, in all probablity, means that they'll have to sell the team. We are one step closer to Mark Cuban or some other rich dude interested in investing heavily to bring the Blue a winner. Let's face it - Frank doesn't have any money. This is not the Milwaukee Dodgers, but it sure has felt like it during this regime. Frank charges us BIG BUCKS to attend a game at the Ravine and the product is boring boring boring. It's so worth it to drive down the 5 to Anaheim where Artie Moreno charges literally HALF as much for a much superior product and a far superior experience. Goodbye McCourts - go back to your parking lots in Beantown.....
Alexis - 13 years ago
She contributed significantly to the Dodger organization and clearly the jude saw that as well. People who don't understand are simply dismissing her because she is a woman involved in a man's sport. It's unfortunate they couldn't figure this out on their own...greed took over on this one.
grilled dodgerdawg - 13 years ago
Should have included box for neither as I don't want them to own Dodgers. Voted for the lesser of two evils but both are worthless.
If Jamie McCourt signed a legal document that was later "modified" by an attorney working for her husband, giving him ownership of the team, then the judge did the right thing. Now hopefully, they will do the right thing and sell the team. And why was it necessary to make nasty remarks about her apperance?
Once that attorney testified that he swapped out a page to change what Jamie had signed off on and didn't bring it to her for approval the agreement was void because there hadn't been a mutual agreement to a material term. That is first year of law school contracts law. I hope they sell to a local owner who doesn't manage them like the Clippers.
Neither, actually. The best thing for the Dodgers is for someone to buy the team.
The judge ruling in favor of Jamie McCourt is a victory for all Dodger fans. This, in all probablity, means that they'll have to sell the team. We are one step closer to Mark Cuban or some other rich dude interested in investing heavily to bring the Blue a winner. Let's face it - Frank doesn't have any money. This is not the Milwaukee Dodgers, but it sure has felt like it during this regime. Frank charges us BIG BUCKS to attend a game at the Ravine and the product is boring boring boring. It's so worth it to drive down the 5 to Anaheim where Artie Moreno charges literally HALF as much for a much superior product and a far superior experience. Goodbye McCourts - go back to your parking lots in Beantown.....
She contributed significantly to the Dodger organization and clearly the jude saw that as well. People who don't understand are simply dismissing her because she is a woman involved in a man's sport. It's unfortunate they couldn't figure this out on their own...greed took over on this one.
Should have included box for neither as I don't want them to own Dodgers. Voted for the lesser of two evils but both are worthless.