Universal Sports Creates Boston Marathon Videos Daktronics Building EverBank Field Displays Paul Simon On Joe DiMaggio Encounter Knicks To Own/Operate D-League Team Bud Light Hotel Headed To Final Four Overnight Ratings Lions Owner William Clay Ford Dies At 88 Oakland Teams Still Searching For New Venues U.S. Likely To Set World Cup Attendance Record Lions Ownership Staying In Ford Family
SBD/November 2, 2012/Labor and AgentsPrint All
A federal court judge in L.A. on Thursday said he would be issuing an order dismissing all 12 legal claims Priority Sports & Entertainment filed against former employee and NBA player agent Aaron Mintz and CAA, parent of Mintz’s new employer, CAA Sports. Judge Stephen Wilson also said the order would dismiss Mintz’ motion for a declaratory judgment finding restrictive provisions in Mintz’ Priority employment contract were unenforceable under Calfornia law. Priority’s attorneys said in court earlier this week that they would not try to enforce those provisions and Wilson said no declaratory relief was necessary. “There is no controversy,” Wilson said. A trial is still set for Nov. 13 on the matter, but it is not clear now if it will go forward as only two counts Mintz filed against Priority -- alleging defamation and interference with prospective economic advantage -- remain. Wilson has stated those two counts cannot be proven unless current or former NBA player clients of Mintz’ testify at the trial. Robert Horn, attorney for Mintz and CAA, said he did not know if the NBA players would be able to testify at trial because of their schedules. Mintz left Priority to take a job at CAA Sports in March and filed suit the same day, asking for declaratory relief releasing him from the restrictive provisions in his employment agreement. Mintz later filed another suit against Priority, alleging defamation, among other things, against Priority. Priority countersued, alleging 12 legal causes of action against Mintz and/or CAA, including breach of contract, breach of loyalty, conspiracy and misappropriation of trade secrets. Wilson told attorneys for both sides that he would explain his reasoning in a 26-page order he had authored. The order was not available at press time for this story.