More Trouble Brewing in Ann Arbor?

[Aardvark86]

Eagerly awaiting your detailed rebuttal counselor

Right. When I went to law school, to get a tro, you had to have a low likelihood of success on the merits, harm that could easily be compensated simply by money damages, and, since it's an equitable remedy, the party requesting the TRO need not come into court with "clean hands".

 

[PA_JOE]

I am having such a good time watching these cheating bastards and their minions that post here squirm I am breaking out in song. I will be singing this to every blue and piss colored fan on Saturday. Please feel free to edit and improve (tune set to Hail to the Victors)…

SHAME on the dirty LIARS!
SHAME on the filthy CHEATERS!
FAIL..FAIL…by MICHIGAN!
The CHEATERS the WORST!

 

[Aardvark86]

Long post on Ohio State board re: TRO gambit:
….

Not a trial lawyer, and someone succinctly stated it in another thread what the elements of a TRO are, but I have practiced corporate law and have had attempts to issue TROs. Basically in laymen terms, the affected party has to show irreparable harm would be done, and the TRO would mitigate the harm or potentially stop the harm from occurring. But not only that, among other things, they have to also show that the merits of a case they are pursuing against the other party is likely to succeed (subjective language makes this a crap shoot basically). So, first have to figure out who would have standing to request the TRO, Harbs or UM. Let’s just useUM and say UM thinks that a suspension is an action that is taken against them, so they would have standing to submit for a TRO, they would have to show that the suspension would cause irreparable harm to them as a university. They also have to show that they would likely to succeed on reversing the action in court. I find it very hard that UM could argue they would be irreparably harmed by such action, as it doesn’t affect the ability to play, and since they played 3 games already this year without him, they can’t argue that they can’t win without him. I do think the self imposed suspension really hurts their argument. They also have to prove in a lawsuit, they would be likely to succeed. The lawsuit would have to be breach of contract, between BigTen and UM. UM would have to argue that the bylaws/procedure weren’t followed or the suspension lacked cause.

For the first element, I think it’s hard for UM to argue irreparable harm. What exactly would be harmed? UM won without him at the beginning of the year. Harbs can’t exactly claim irreparable harm either, cause he would be getting paid. What is he exactly losing?

For the second, I don’t see how they can claim that there isn’t cause to suspend, as there is a true question on Harbs involvement and velar lack of institutional control (all the issues put together, not just the Stallions/cheating issue). By giving UM opportunity to respond to the punishment, it essentially negates the lack of following procedure. So that would be hard for them to argue.

Then there are issues of balance of equities, and then having to produce evidence that would go against the narrative.

And Judges don’t usually issue TROs, unless immediate and dangerous situation (in my limited experience). They would rather it get heard properly and hear both sides.

So, personally, I think BigTen is just playing chess with UM. They want to threaten legal, BigTem will cover its bases to meet the letter of the contract. Weakens an already weak TRO threat

In all seriousness though...
1. Likelihood of success - no idea here, because I'm not sure exactly what their claim is. Breach of contract? (Note, don't say 'due process' since BIG is not a government agency.)
2. Irreparable harm - this is actually probably a little easier, in that they can argue that the timing is such that their potential ability to play for a championship is being put at risk, and that's arguably more than monetary. Whether that's a significant legally cognizable harm may be a question though.
3. Balance of equities - uh, he's suspended for cheating/potential cheating, which may involve criminal behavior. Methinks a court is likely to believe that the interests of the conference and competitors just might outweigh those of the University.

 

[Chickenman Testa]

In all seriousness though...
1. Likelihood of success - no idea here, because I'm not sure exactly what their claim is. Breach of contract? (Note, don't say 'due process' since BIG is not a government agency.)
2. Irreparable harm - this is actually probably a little easier, in that they can argue that the timing is such that their potential ability to play for a championship is being put at risk, and that's arguably more than monetary. Whether that's a significant legally cognizable harm may be a question though.
3. Balance of equities - uh, he's suspended for cheating/potential cheating, which may involve criminal behavior. Methinks a court is likely to believe that the interests of the conference and competitors just might outweigh those of the University.

#3 seems to be key. It does not look good for UM that ALL the rest of the conference brethren appear to be aligned - even those who are never competitive and usually exhibit characteristics of Stockholm Syndrome vis-à-vis Michigan in conference matters. To a man, ADs and coaches seem to be on the same page here.

We will see but the popcorn is tasty from my seat in the balcony

 

[Westcoast24]

I am having such a good time watching these cheating bastards and their minions that post here squirm I am breaking out in song. I will be singing this to every blue and piss colored fan on Saturday. Please feel free to edit and improve (tune set to Hail to the Victors)…

SHAME on the dirty LIARS!
SHAME on the filthy CHEATERS!
FAIL..FAIL…by MICHIGAN!
The CHEATERS the WORST!

did you write that yourself or was that from something else.

 

[Aardvark86]

#3 seems to be key. It does not look good for UM that ALL the rest of the conference brethren appear to be aligned - even those who are never competitive and usually exhibit characteristics of Stockholm Syndrome vis-à-vis Michigan in conference matters. To a man, ADs and coaches seem to be on the same page here.

We will see but the popcorn is tasty from my seat in the balcony

BTW, my further assumption would be that Michigan's probably not likely to get this before some homer alum judge with season tickets in Michigan state court, as the BIG would likely immediate seek to remove any action to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. (I suppose UM might try to include some instate defendant to defeat jurisdiction. I don't know whether the BIG structure would require participation of the member institutions, but I'd be surprised if that were the case.)

 

[Westcoast24]

In all seriousness though...
1. Likelihood of success - no idea here, because I'm not sure exactly what their claim is. Breach of contract? (Note, don't say 'due process' since BIG is not a government agency.)
2. Irreparable harm - this is actually probably a little easier, in that they can argue that the timing is such that their potential ability to play for a championship is being put at risk, and that's arguably more than monetary. Whether that's a significant legally cognizable harm may be a question though.
3. Balance of equities - uh, he's suspended for cheating/potential cheating, which may involve criminal behavior. Methinks a court is likely to believe that the interests of the conference and competitors just might outweigh those of the University.

What is the criminal part? I understand the alleged cheating but haven’t seen criminal part yet

 

[Aardvark86]

What is the criminal part? I understand the alleged cheating but haven’t seen criminal part yet

Any moron could cobble together a wire fraud claim here given the use of electronic communications devices and the fact they guy was presumably paid using public funds and that an aim of the fraud was access to the big money playoffs.

 

[Westcoast24]

Any moron could cobble together a wire fraud claim here given the use of electronic communications devices and the fact they guy was presumably paid using public funds and that an aim of the fraud was access to the big money playoffs.

I see

 

[Aardvark86]

I see

BTW, that is also even assuming that the separate FBI investigation on the computer crimes matter is in fact unrelated (contrary to a few rumors).

 

[Thomas1945]

#3 seems to be key. It does not look good for UM that ALL the rest of the conference brethren appear to be aligned - even those who are never competitive and usually exhibit characteristics of Stockholm Syndrome vis-à-vis Michigan in conference matters. To a man, ADs and coaches seem to be on the same page here.

We will see but the popcorn is tasty from my seat in the balcony

We may be playing Courthouse ping pong this week. Honestly, it’s not beyond the pale that UM could find a “friendly” judge to issue a TRO regardless of the merits. Immediately then the BIG (depending on how hard they’re willing to push this) could find a “non UM friendly judge” to vacate the order. Bye my estimate that should take us to perhaps late Friday afternoon. Good luck finding the proper appellate court (at that point it probably is ( the Federal Circuit Court ) willing to act.

 

[PA_JOE]

That is a PA JOE original!

did you write that yourself or was that from something else.

 

[Thomas1945]

That is a PA JOE original!

And here I thought Yogi passed away a few years ago.

 

[Aardvark86]

We may be playing Courthouse ping pong this week. Honestly, it’s not beyond the pale that UM could find a “friendly” judge to issue a TRO regardless of the merits. Immediately then the BIG (depending on how hard they’re willing to push this) could find a “non UM friendly judge” to vacate the order. Bye my estimate that should take us to perhaps late Friday afternoon. Good luck finding the proper appellate court (at that point it probably is ( the Federal Circuit Court ) willing to act.

Finding a friendly judge is very hard to do in federal court, unless of course your university happens to be located in Amarillo, Texas. If they go to state court, I think the better sports analogy will be a 60m dash (to the federal courthouse in Chicago) rather than ping pong. Once the removal notice is filed, the state court is deprived of jurisdiction pending any motion for remand.

 

[PSU2UNC]

We may be playing Courthouse ping pong this week. Honestly, it’s not beyond the pale that UM could find a “friendly” judge to issue a TRO regardless of the merits. Immediately then the BIG (depending on how hard they’re willing to push this) could find a “non UM friendly judge” to vacate the order. Bye my estimate that should take us to perhaps late Friday afternoon. Good luck finding the proper appellate court (at that point it probably is ( the Federal Circuit Court ) willing to act.

Friday is also a federal holiday as well as a state holiday in Michigan. If the suspension isn't issued until Wednesday (as has been speculated), it seems super unlikely UM could get a TR by COB on Thursday.

 

[LandoComando]

As a PSU fan I wanted to see Michigan punished ASAP. It makes sense that I'm participating in this discussion.

You claim to be a PSU fan (you clearly are not) but your level of involvement and presented theses are inconsistent with that.

Not sure why you still don't comprehend the discussion is what will happen. What any of us want is irrelevant. I think Harbaugh should be suspend with pay immediately. I also believe a large part of this is people, you included, that are still mad about what happened to us so you don't want to let it play out.

 

[hfhmilkman]

Long post on Ohio State board re: TRO gambit:
….

Not a trial lawyer, and someone succinctly stated it in another thread what the elements of a TRO are, but I have practiced corporate law and have had attempts to issue TROs. Basically in laymen terms, the affected party has to show irreparable harm would be done, and the TRO would mitigate the harm or potentially stop the harm from occurring. But not only that, among other things, they have to also show that the merits of a case they are pursuing against the other party is likely to succeed (subjective language makes this a crap shoot basically). So, first have to figure out who would have standing to request the TRO, Harbs or UM. Let’s just useUM and say UM thinks that a suspension is an action that is taken against them, so they would have standing to submit for a TRO, they would have to show that the suspension would cause irreparable harm to them as a university. They also have to show that they would likely to succeed on reversing the action in court. I find it very hard that UM could argue they would be irreparably harmed by such action, as it doesn’t affect the ability to play, and since they played 3 games already this year without him, they can’t argue that they can’t win without him. I do think the self imposed suspension really hurts their argument. They also have to prove in a lawsuit, they would be likely to succeed. The lawsuit would have to be breach of contract, between BigTen and UM. UM would have to argue that the bylaws/procedure weren’t followed or the suspension lacked cause.

For the first element, I think it’s hard for UM to argue irreparable harm. What exactly would be harmed? UM won without him at the beginning of the year. Harbs can’t exactly claim irreparable harm either, cause he would be getting paid. What is he exactly losing?

For the second, I don’t see how they can claim that there isn’t cause to suspend, as there is a true question on Harbs involvement and velar lack of institutional control (all the issues put together, not just the Stallions/cheating issue). By giving UM opportunity to respond to the punishment, it essentially negates the lack of following procedure. So that would be hard for them to argue.

Then there are issues of balance of equities, and then having to produce evidence that would go against the narrative.

And Judges don’t usually issue TROs, unless immediate and dangerous situation (in my limited experience). They would rather it get heard properly and hear both sides.

So, personally, I think BigTen is just playing chess with UM. They want to threaten legal, BigTem will cover its bases to meet the letter of the contract. Weakens an already weak TRO threat.

This argument makes no sense. The lawyer argues that because Jim Harbaugh was not on the sideline for non conference opponents that Michigan could have won without a coaching staff is proof that Harbaugh's presence for let us say the OSU game has no impact. I shout Whisky Tango Foxtrot!! Of course the head coach not being available for a rivalry game has a huge impact. UM did a self suspension because it was easy and risk free. I could have coached Michigan to victory even if I intentionally mucked every call.

This guy also does not understand the logic of the TRO request. As of today there is "No" official evidence or allegation made against Jim Harbaugh. The efficacy of the TRO is to force discovery. Discovery determines the answer to the question of expectation of success in the allegation. Peter Thamel's diatribes are not evidence. Discovery will force whoever represents the Big10 to put in front of a judge what is the evidence that makes a punishment inevitable after the conclusion of an investigation and the presentation of an official allegation. Likely to succeed is put on the onus of whoever represents the Big10.

This is just like voter fraud. Anyone can say anything to the media. There is no consequence to misconstruing for a good story. Not saying that this is just a story. You just can't lie to a judge nor be arbitrary.

Now the Big10 has good lawyers. We will know what the lawyers think by their action or inaction. If they don't do anything its probably because they know they will get face planted. However, they might for appearances. Our governor Whitmer attempted to close a pipeline to look good to the progressives. She knew it was futile because the pipeline was governed by a sovereign treaty with Canada. But she could say she was a good little progressive for no cost. Big Ten commish might take the same tack.

Nothing happened today.

 

[Thomas1945]

Finding a friendly judge is very hard to do in federal court, unless of course your university happens to be located in Amarillo, Texas. If they go to state court, I think the better sports analogy will be a 60m dash (to the federal courthouse in Chicago) rather than ping pong. Once the removal notice is filed, the state court is deprived of jurisdiction pending any motion for remand.

I agree, however I strongly suggest that Amarillo College and West Texas A&M aren’t the only two schools in the USA able to find friendly judges. 😀😄🤣

 

[PSU2UNC]

Not sure why you still don't comprehend the discussion is what will happen. What any of us want is irrelevant. I think Harbaugh should be suspend with pay immediately. I also believe a large part of this is people, you included, that are still mad about what happened to us so you don't want to let it play out.

You miss my point completely, but that is not surprising.

 

[Aardvark86]

I agree, however I strongly suggest that Amarillo College and West Texas A&M aren’t the only two schools in the USA able to find friendly judges. 😀😄🤣

In federal court, there's almost always 'some' risk outside of amarillo. state court, easier, but as noted, any litigation isnot going to be in state court very long

 

[PSU2UNC]

. As of today there is "No" official evidence or allegation made against Jim Harbaugh.

This in incorrect. He is responsible for whatever happens in his program, so if there are allegations against Stalions (there are), he is ultimately responsible for that.

Discovery determines the answer to the question of expectation of success in the allegation. Peter Thamel's diatribes are not evidence. Discovery will force whoever represents the Big10 to put in front of a judge what is the evidence that makes a punishment inevitable after the conclusion of an investigation and the presentation of an official allegation. Likely to succeed is put on the onus of whoever represents the Big10.

Michigan DOES NOT WANT discovery. That would be disasterous for them. Unless you really think no one in the program did anything wrong. And if you think that, I have several bridges to sell you.

 

[Thomas1945]

In federal court, there's almost always 'some' risk outside of amarillo. state court, easier, but as noted, any litigation isnot going to be in state court very long

You know I actually Goggled what fine institutions of higher learning are located in Amarillo. Just to insure that you weren’t trying to slip a high hard one past me.

 

[Aardvark86]

You know I actually Goggled what fine institutions of higher learning are located in Amarillo. Just to insure that you weren’t trying to slip a high hard one past me.

I would note that Judge Kacsmnaryk's law degree is from UT-A, so probably not a preferred site for UM anyway.

 

[Chickenman Testa]

This in incorrect. He is responsible for whatever happens in his program, so if there are allegations against Stalions (there are), he is ultimately responsible for that.

Michigan DOES NOT WANT discovery. That would be disasterous for them. Unless you really think no one in the program did anything wrong. And if you think that, I have several bridges to sell you.

What is happening to all the laptops in Schembechler Hall right now:



Metal Magnet GIF by reactionseditor

 

[fastlax16]

What is happening to all the laptops in Schembechler Hall right now:

Metal Magnet GIF by reactionseditor

Given the FBIs apparent interest in the program for other matters, that would be unwise.

 

[bluehair666]

What law do you practice?

none, but i have outstanding reading comprehension...half of the BOR at UM are lawyers, pretty sure they and the lawyers on retainer know what they're doing...but go ahead and keep sourcing nevada buck and zach smith... 😘

 

[Aardvark86]

Given the FBIs apparent interest in the program for other matters, that would be unwise.

To say the least...(Note my second block signature line)

 

[bluehair666]

BTW, that is also even assuming that the separate FBI investigation on the computer crimes matter is in fact unrelated (contrary to a few rumors).

AAPD on record, who's pushing your rumors?.. 🤡

 

[Aardvark86]

AAPD on record, who's pushing your rumors?.. 🤡

not me, and as I said, nor am I counting them for much of anything other than, at best, a potential collateral source of computer information

 

[fastlax16]

This argument makes no sense. The lawyer argues that because Jim Harbaugh was not on the sideline for non conference opponents that Michigan could have won without a coaching staff is proof that Harbaugh's presence for let us say the OSU game has no impact. I shout Whisky Tango Foxtrot!! Of course the head coach not being available for a rivalry game has a huge impact. UM did a self suspension because it was easy and risk free. I could have coached Michigan to victory even if I intentionally mucked every call.

This guy also does not understand the logic of the TRO request. As of today there is "No" official evidence or allegation made against Jim Harbaugh. The efficacy of the TRO is to force discovery. Discovery determines the answer to the question of expectation of success in the allegation. Peter Thamel's diatribes are not evidence. Discovery will force whoever represents the Big10 to put in front of a judge what is the evidence that makes a punishment inevitable after the conclusion of an investigation and the presentation of an official allegation. Likely to succeed is put on the onus of whoever represents the Big10.

The point makes sense. Claiming Harbaugh missing games causes irreparable harm is damaged by the fact that Michigan suspended him multiple games already this season. Michigan is going to have to sell "we only suspended him for easy games" and have a judge buy it. Michigan has also lost football games to Ohio State in the past and survived, so I'm not sure the possibility of losing a football game rises to the level of irreparable harm.

Odds are you don't know what the Big Ten is in possession or what allegations they've made to Michigan unless your name is Santa. There is no requirement the conference or NCAA make everything public.

 

[Aardvark86]

The point makes sense. Claiming Harbaugh missing games causes irreparable harm is damaged by the fact that Michigan suspended him multiple games already this season. Michigan is going to have to sell "we only suspended him for easy games" and have a judge buy it.

Odds are you don't know what the Big Ten is in possession or what allegations they've made to Michigan unless your name is Santa.

It's easy enough to articulate/describe the potential nonmonetary irreparable harm, but it's actually pretty hard to suggest that it's either "imminent" or "nonspeculative" because at the end of the, it's premised on the assumption that they lose without him and that said loss ruins their championship aspirations.

 

[Chickenman Testa]

To say the least...(Note my second block signature line)

I like that phrase - as I like your avatar Bumble.

My favorite legal-related Latin Phrase is res ipsa loquitur.

While we aren’t in a Negligence context here, it kind of fits the frantic defensiveness shown by our Michigan visitors lately

 

[Aardvark86]

I like that phrase - as I like your avatar Bumble.

My favorite legal-related Latin Phrase is res ipsa loquitur.

While we aren’t in a Negligence context here, it kind of fits the frantic defensiveness shown by our Michigan visitors lately

and I have always admired your Les Grossman avatar. A truly underrated character.

 

[Thomas1945]

The point makes sense. Claiming Harbaugh missing games causes irreparable harm is damaged by the fact that Michigan suspended him multiple games already this season. Michigan is going to have to sell "we only suspended him for easy games" and have a judge buy it. Michigan has also lost football games to Ohio State in the past and survived, so I'm not sure the possibility of losing a football game rises to the level of irreparable harm.

Odds are you don't know what the Big Ten is in possession or what allegations they've made to Michigan unless your name is Santa. There is no requirement the conference or NCAA make everything public.

Actually, if the BIG were smart (I know an oxymoron) and if they had the slightest suspicion that Santa would act in the way he did, divulging all their evidence to him at the meeting would have been foolish.

 

[Chickenman Testa]

and I have always admired your Les Grossman avatar. A truly underrated character.

Your typical Michigan fan right now behind their confident facade:

 

[PAgeologist]

I like that phrase - as I like your avatar Bumble.

My favorite legal-related Latin Phrase is res ipsa loquitur.

While we aren’t in a Negligence context here, it kind of fits the frantic defensiveness shown by our Michigan visitors lately

I haven't seen wolve1972 chime in on this. We need his comedically over the top thoughts on this.

 

[PAgeologist]

Your typical Michigan fan right now behind their confident facade:

 

[Aardvark86]

Your typical Michigan fan right now behind their confident facade:

For years, I had sort of a love-hate relationship with the comedy of Martin Short, as it seemed so 'over the top' as to be occasionally contrived. Then I saw him perform live, and I realized that it's actually that he's completely fearless, which is a pretty damn good thing to be for a comedian.

 

[Thomas1945]

I haven't seen wolve1972 chime in on this. We need his comedically over the top thoughts on this.

Since Wolvie is I believe really an OSU fan he’s probably doing back flips and drinking champagne in Columbus.

 

[Obliviax]