Sep 21, 2010, 3:36 PM EDT
The nuances of the dispute between Frank and Jamie are kind of technical inasmuch as they involve the operation and effect of a legal document governing the McCourts’ assets, Dodgers included.
But one thing that makes things simple is when the lawyer who drafted the thing testifies under oath that he messed with the document after it was signed by the parties, changing it from one that split the Dodgers between Frank and Jamie to one that gave the team solely to Frank. Which is what happened in court this morning. Read the L.A. Times’ account of the testimony. It’s brutal.
I’m obviously not following this thing filing-by-filing and exhibit-by-exhibit, but I have a hard time seeing how a judge can give legal effect to a document that a lawyer admitted under oath was fundamentally altered after its execution. And if he doesn’t, it means the Dodgers are joint property. Which means that, to finish off the divorce, either Frank or Jamie will have to buy the other one out.
And since they don’t have the cash for that, it would mean the team would have to be sold.
- 2015 Preview: Seattle Mariners 12
- Cardinals add “OT” patch for Oscar Taveras 75
- 2015 Preview: Pittsburgh Pirates 12
- 2015 Preview: San Diego Padres 22
- MLB is looking into some strange gambling tweets involving Marlins pitcher Jarred Cosart 46
- 2015 Preview: New York Yankees 63
- 2015 Preview: Cleveland Indians 10
- Dodgers sign Cuban star Hector Olivera for $62.5 million 55
- College baseball player cut after making offensive tweet about Mo’ne Davis (115)
- Ex-Cardinals outfielder Curt Ford was assaulted in St. Louis and told to “go back to Ferguson” (99)
- Joe West ejects A.J. Pierzynski by calmly telling the Braves’ dugout “you need a new catcher.” (97)
- Mo’ne Davis says college ballplayer who wrote an offensive tweet about her deserves a second chance (88)
- Cardinals add “OT” patch for Oscar Taveras (76)