Showing posts with label Intellectual Property and Privacy - Players. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Intellectual Property and Privacy - Players. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Former Cardinals Slugger Albert Pujols Sues Former Cardinals Slugger Jack Clark for On-Air Accusations of PED Use

Jose Alberto Pujols Alcantara v. Jack Anthony Clark
St. Louis County Circuit Court, 13SL-CC03506

What Happened?

On August, 2, 2013, former Major League star Jack Clark accused Albert Pujols of having used performance enhancing drugs earlier in his career.  Clark alleged that he was informed back in 2000 by Pujols’ former trainer that he had "shot (Pujols) up" with steroids.  The show’s co-host also said he long had suspected that Pujols has used steroids to which Clark allegedly responded, "I know for a fact he was."

Albert Pujols, has maintained all along that he has never used performance enhancing substances of any kind.  In response to the broadcast, the radio station issued a retraction and apology to Pujols:

InsideSTL Enterprises publicly retracts the allegations of PED use by Albert Pujols made on the station recently.  We regret that these statements were made.  To the extent that our transmission and broadcast of these statements was perceived by anyone as indicating support for, or validation of, those allegations, we emphasize that we had no advance knowledge of the allegations, we did not make them, we know of no proof or evidence to substantiate them, and we disavow and retract them.
We believe that Albert Pujols is a man of principle, faith, and character.  We sincerely apologize to Albert Pujols, and his wife and family, for any damage this situation may have caused them, and we assure them that insideSTL has tremendous respect for the person he is, both on and off the field.
Additionally, the radio show was pulled from the air after only 7 broadcasts.
Despite the apology, Pujols has now filed a lawsuit against Clark, individually, seeking unspecified damages for defamation of character.  He claims that Clark’s, statements were "malicious, reckless and outrageous falsehoods" and have caused him “personal humiliation, mental anguish and anxiety.” 

Pujols further characterizes his own reputation as "impeccable and beyond reproach" and portrays Clark as a "struggling radio talk show host."  

Lie Detector Test

Via his attorneys, Clark has offered to take a lie detector test if Pujols will sit for one as well.



What’s Next?

Updates will be posted as new information emerges.

Friday, October 4, 2013

A-Rod Sues Major League Baseball and Bud Selig Over PED Suspension

Alexander Rodriguez v. Major League Baseball, et al.
Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, No. 0653436 (2013)

What Happened?

Beleaguered superstar Alex Rodriguez has filed a lawsuit in New York state court against Major League Baseball, the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball and Bud Selig, individually, alleging tortious conduct with “one, and only one, goal: to improperly marshal evidence that they hope to use to destroy the reputation and career of Alex Rodriguez, one of the most accomplished Major League Baseball players of all time…the ‘savior’ of America’s pastime.”

The complaint initially focuses on the alleged “vigilante justice” in MLB’s investigation of the Biogenesis clinic, calling the investigation a “witch hunt” and singling out Rodriguez for “an unprecedented 211-game suspension, the longest non-permanent ban in baseball history.”  It is further claimed that Selig even appeared on the David Letterman show three weeks before Rodriguez’s suspension was officially announced to discuss the investigation and the financial consequences of the punishment, which will exceed $100 million, in Selig’s estimation.

Rodriguez’s baseball acumen is highlighted, portraying him as “one of the most accomplished baseball players of all time,” including having been the youngest player to surpass the 500 and 600 home run barriers, breaking the records set by Jimmie Foxx and Babe Ruth, respectively.  Off the field, he details a $3.9 million donation to the University of Miami to renovate its baseball stadium. 

Bud Selig’s tenure as commissioner is depicted as “disastrous” and the Mitchell report is evoked to highlight an allegation that Selig “deliberately turned a blind eye to prolific steroid use because of the overwhelmingly positive publicity generated by the record-breaking competitions of [Mark] McGwire, [Sammy] Sosa and [Barry] Bonds.”

Rodriguez seeks compensatory and punitive damages from the defendants claiming that their misconduct has interfered with actual and prospective contractual relationships with third parties, including the New York Yankees.

The Current Collective Bargaining Agreement

In 1968, the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA), led by Marvin Miller, entered into its first collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with Major League Baseball, governing the terms and conditions of employment as an MLB player.  The CBA is periodically negotiated and the current agreement is set to expire on December 1, 2016.

Additionally, the MLBPA entered into a Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program with MLB, seeking to deter the use of banned substances, including anabolic steroids and other performance enhancing drugs and to "provide for...an orderly, systematic, and cooperative resolution of any disputes that may arise concerning the existence, interpretation, or application" of the policy itself. 

After the Mitchell report was published, the Joint Drug Agreement was amended to allow for a more rigorous system of testing and punishment.  This past January, the Joint Drug Agreement was amended again to allow for in-season testing.  Not surprisingly, the Joint Drug Agreement contains confidentiality provisions regarding player information.

Biogenesis

In January 2013, the Miami New Times, published documents allegedly obtained from Biogenesis, an anti-aging clinic located in Coral Gables, Florida that purportedly identified a number of Major League players who used the clinic to obtain human growth hormone and other performance enhancing drugs.  MLB thereafter sued Biogenesis, owner Anthony Bosch and others in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court. 

Rodriguez, who makes his home in Florida, was allegedly linked to the Biogenesis Clinic in these documents.  It is Rodriguez’s allegation that the true purpose for the Biogenesis Suit was to allow MLB to circumvent the agreed procedures and obtain “evidence” to “allow MLB to publicly shame and ultimately suspend Mr. Rodriguez and other ballplayers.”

It is further alleged that MLB issued a notices to Rodriguez’s former attorneys and public relations firm, seeking documents concerning their representation of Mr. Rodriguez and that these were undertaken “solely with the intent of harming Mr. Rodriguez and interfering with his business relationships.” 

The complaint alleges that several individuals connected with the Biogenesis clinic were harassed by MLB’s investigators, offered money for their cooperation and even that the MLB “is paying [Anthony] Bosch a total of  $5 million (in monthly installments) in order to buy his cooperation.”

What Is Alleged in the Lawsuit?

Rodriguez alleges that Major League Baseball officials “tortiously and maliciously” made statements and leaked information in order to damage A-Rod’s public reputation and prevent him from performing under his contract with the Yankees.  It is further alleged that this was done to impugn Rodriguez’s public opinion and to bolster “Selig’s goal of cementing his legacy as the commissioner who cleaned up baseball.”  Rodriguez’s 211-game suspension was officially announced on August 5, 2013.
 
Rodriguez claims that the MLB’s conduct in failing to keep the investigation matters private has permanently harmed his reputation and ability to secure and retain endorsement contacts.  For instance, he claims that Nike and Toyota terminated their deals with him and that his voice-over work on the animated film “Henry and Me” was cut.  Additionally, he claims that the suspension would cause him to lose “tens of millions of dollars in salary.” 

Rodriguez brings causes of action under tortuous interference with existing contracts and tortuous interference with prospective business relationships and seeks compensatory and punitive damages to be determined at trial.

What Comes Next?

The defendants will either answer, file motions to dismiss or seek removal to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. 

Updates will be posted as the case progresses, so check back often.

 


Thursday, August 29, 2013

Yogi Berra Sues TBS for Racy “Sex and the City” Advertisement

Lawrence Peter Berra v. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc.
Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, No. 05600339

What happened?

According to the complaint, Turner Broadcasting System acquired the rights to broadcast “Sex and the City” and from April, 2004 to August, 2004 heavily promoted the program through print advertisements, subway kiosks, display boards and on public buses in New York City and elsewhere in the State of New York. 

The advertisement that Yogi Berra took exception to read as follows:

“Yogasm:

a) a type of yo-yo trick
b) sex with Yogi Berra
c) what Samantha has with a guy from yoga class.”

The advertisement included a picture of the character Samantha, played by Kim Cattrall, in a “rather alluring pose.”

The Offending Advertisement
Mr. Berra asserted that as a husband, father and grandfather he is deeply religious, maintains a moral lifestyle and “has a spotless reputation for integrity, decency and moral character.” Not surprisingly, Mr. Berra claimed that he had not given permission for TBS to use his name in the advertisement. He further alleged that the advertisement damaged his reputation and that he was not compensated for the use of his name in the advertising campaign.

Mr. Berra sought $5,000,000 in damages under the New York Civil Rights Law and an additional $5,000,000 in damages for unjust enrichment.

Who won?

Yogi Berra, via settlement. The case was reportedly settled out-of-court; however, the terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

Why?

Under § 50 of the Civil Rights Law of New York a person, firm or corporation can be found guilty of a misdemeanor if the name or photograph of a living person is used in an advertisement without that person’s consent.

Furthermore, § 51 allows the person to sue to stop the use of the name or photo and for damages arising from the unauthorized use, including exemplary damages.