(03-07-2018 01:39 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-07-2018 01:05 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Provision 14 (Force Majeure) ends with

Quote:Any games not played as scheduled shall be rescheduled as exigencies may dictate or permit.

Isn't it a more reasonable interpretation that
1. Force Majeure applies to playing the game in 2017. Miami made a call, their call stands.
2. The force majeure clause of the contract calls for the game to be rescheduled "as exigencies may dictate or permit." But there is no force majeure stopping the game from being played on mutually available dates in 2020 or 2022 or 2023.* Doesn't that imply "as soon as reasonably possible"? So requiring a strong reason to veto a date, not just "We'd like to start playing 7 home games a year"?

Unless there is a specific legal meaning for "as exigencies may dictate or permit", that sounds vague enough that Miami would be within the contract to offer a game date in 2024 or 2025. The language is vague -- doesn't allow Miami to just walk away for free, doesn't allow Arkansas State to choose the date for rescheduling -- and both sides have to live with that.

I still think this is just a dispute over whether Miami pays $0 or $650,000 or some number in between.

Not sure what the legal meaning is, but the general meaning is...as soon as possible after the need to deal with the emergency situation is over.

Now does that mean that the game must be rescheduled to occur as soon as exigencies permit...or that the game rescheduling must be done as soon as exigencies permit?

The latter makes no sense to me as that allows the plumber to reschedule the work for 2029 with no penalty.

If that turns out to be the case then you better start spelling it out in future contracts, especially with Miami.





Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk