(03-06-2018 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-06-2018 01:23 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-05-2018 11:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-05-2018 10:13 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-05-2018 06:24 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, if ARK wins, it will not be because of dates, it will be because the court decides "force majeur" didn't apply, and Miami could have played.

I don't think that's likely either, but to me it's more likely than that ARK will win on the dates. The contract says zero about playing sooner rather than later. It doesn't say that the home team of a canceled game is entitled to play so as to maximize their economics regardless of how that impacts on the away team, and rightly so, since the away team was not able to play.

Bottom line: If FM applies, Arkansas State isn't entitled to any consideration w/regard to rescheduling moreso than Miami, because Miami is 100% blameless for the cancellation.

The force majeure clause doesn't look good for Miami. If it said "impractical" or "inconvenient" they would have an argument. It was absolutely inconvenient, there is a straight face argument that can be made that it was impractical to play. Impossible is very tough hurdle.

What is interesting is that one of Miami's arguments is that it is entitled to a declaratory judgment because Arkansas State is being unreasonable in asking Miami to play on a date Miami has open but does not want to make available.

I think that clause looks great for Miami. There was a Federal and State of Emergency in their area at the time. If I'm a judge, that's all i need to know to not second-guess decisions made by school officials, really it should take about 10 seconds for the judge to find in Miami's favor on that.

As I said before, there's no reason for a "clause" of any kind to handle truly impossible situations, because it goes without saying that no party can be held in breach of contract for failing to do something that is impossible to do. The existence of the clause is meant to explain what should happen in the event an emergency makes playing onerous, unwise, etc.

You seem to be under the impression the game was to be in Miami. There were evacuation orders for low lying and coastal areas. The government recommendation was to leave, not to stay.

I'll be shocked if any judge is impressed by arguments made by ARK lawyers - from months removed from the hurricane and from the comfort of a court room - about how Miami officials responded in real time in an emergency situation. Any good judge will be loathe to second guess.

But we'll see ...

Judges generally don't go on emotion or where you are from as a practice.

Any ruling will serve as precedent in Florida regarding Force Majeure...and in Florida thats sort of important.

If a plumber says he can't do the work because a hurricane might hit right after and travel might be difficult....and then refuses to return the deposit...and tells you he can maybe reschedule in 9 months because he might have more profitable work come up and wants to keep his schedule open...

Does a Florida judge want to set the precedent that this is what Force Majeure is for everyone and every business in Florida from now on?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk