Answer On the O'Leary 1.5 million

Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

My thoughts on the subject.

It makes little difference of our thoughts about the matter. It makes a lot of difference between the lawyers and how they interpret the contracts. If Tech's lawyer determines it is wasted money and time to pursue it, then that is it.

However, none of us has any idea of the negotiations between Tech's lawyer and GOL's lawyer. I doubt we would be included in the negotiations. I am sure, legally, the situation is purposely withheld from common knowledge.

We have no idea what has and will take place. It is possible the situation has been settled one way or another. It is also possible GOL is paying it back in small increments. Posters are arguing over something that they have little or no knowledge, and only the lawyers and possibly court can or has settled.

Father Time
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

we went to this analysis at the time and you can search the archives to and probably get the legal analysis

I don't do this type of law so this was based on my recollection from law school.

I think GT would have a claim against ND as a "third party beneficiary" which entitles a third party to assert rights when the contract was for the benefit of the third party.

I believe the contract stated that ND would pay the buy-out clause which should trigger Third Party Beneficiary claim.

I think GT let ND off the hook and is just trying to get it from O'leary but his is just speculation on my part.
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

From an old USA Today article:

O'Leary's resignation from Notre Dame also left questions about a $1.5 million buyout provision that the coach had in his contract with Georgia Tech. Notre Dame officials declined to comment Friday on whether the Irish would honor the buyout.

John Pendergast, the legal counsel for the Georgia Tech Athletic Association, said O'Leary's resignation from Notre Dame "has nothing to do with the contractual obligation between George O'Leary and Georgia Tech."

"The buyout is between Coach O'Leary and Georgia Tech," Pendergast said. He said that if Tech holds O'Leary to the contract and Notre Dame does not cover the buyout, the coach could be held contractually responsible.

It might be hard to demand the compensation, however, since O'Leary is available to coach again. Tech declined the opportunity to rehire O'Leary.

"I really don't know, and right now, quite frankly, it's too soon to tell," Jack Reale, O'Leary's Atlanta-based lawyer, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "It will really depend on the will of the parties and what the legalities would be to enforce that will."

From CNNSI, same time period:

CNNSI.com: Who is responsible for the $1.5 million buyout Notre Dame was to pay Georgia Tech for letting O'Leary out of his contract?

Jack Reale: I would expect there are some cooler heads that have good judgement and will make a wise decision on that issue. Fact is, George is out there and [Georgia Tech] could rehire him if they want him.

Notre Dame perspective:

White said there has been a lot of speculation, most of it incorrect, about how much O'Leary's hiring will cost Notre Dame. He said Notre Dame does not have to pay Georgia Tech a buyout fee for hiring O'Leary.

"When George resigned and terminated his contract, all the conditions under the contract went null and void," he said.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2001-12-15-tech.htm
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

WOW !!!!
This may be the best string ever on this website. There has been excellent argument on both sides of the issue and I for one agree with each one while reading each article. LOL. Since I am no lawyer, I suppose my only credentials are that I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express one night. However it does appear that:
1) When G'O left GT, unless ND went into an agreement with GT to buy G'Os contract, G'O would be the liable party.
2) If ND did pick up the contract from GT for G'O, then ND would be the liable party.
I know this may seem a bit overly simplified but that's just the way it appears.
A) Does anyone know for sure how the agreement went down?
B) Would GTAA open this for the public to see?
C) If ND were to be the responsible party, would it be financially feasable to go after ND for the $1.5M + interest?
D) Would it be better if we just chalked it up as experience and went on with life?
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

I don't care if it is ND or GOL we need to go after the money. Had we done that to ND do you think they would have let us off the hook?
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

If we had fired him, do you think O'L would have let us off the hook for what we owed him per the contract? Why do we set ourselves up and allowed ourselves to get skeeerood? Why is the AA not this generous with us lowly season tix holders? It is time we demand more.
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

In the last portion of the article above ND states that they don't owe GT any money because their contract with GO was null and void - i.e. They were going to pay the buyout but won't now because they don't have a contract with GO.

i.e. if GO had stayed about two weeks instead of five days, GT would have had their buyout paid by ND and then would have fired GO and we would have been with instead of without our 1.5.

ND was going to pay the buy out. They publically said they didn't have a contract with GO and would not pay.

In reality, that's ND trying to bully public opinion. A court of law would recognize that GT is not liable for a bad decision on the behalf of GO.

Once the decision was made by ND to cover the buy out, they were contractually obligated to pay GT - regardless of whether they kept or fired GO. The actual line should have been ND paying GT - then suing GO for the 1.5 because that's what would have happened if they had allowed the matter to go a bit further.

Even if the matter was with GO, If GO offered to honor his contract and come back and we refused, he would be correct in assuming he is off the legal hook. He was bound to be available to be our head coach and was ready to do so and we refused, therefore cancelling the out clause.

Who cares - the money is gone. I just got tired of reading what people can't seem to understand. To me, all of this is like arguing about whether or not the sky is blue. It's amazing to me that anyone thinks GO owes us the money.

I don't think he sould be off the hook because I like him or for what he has done for us. I think he IS off the hook because of basic legal structure. I also think that if - for sake of argument - he is legally bound (which he isn't) - that trying to get the moneyt for him would completely ensure that no coach would ever want to come here to coach.

Either way - the most advantagous route for GT would be not to pursue the money.

It's irritating to read people who know they are wrong continue to debate just to save face.

If you are wrong - do what I do when I am wrong (which happens plenty). Either don't respond and hope the post dies or just say you are wrong - I've done both.

Don't insult me by continuing to verbally assult me with BS that you know is not accurate.
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

Originally posted by AlaGold:
What's $1.5m when you got money flowing in from our 7th straight bowl game?(one that again we probably will not break even on)
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I thought that the ACC was going to cover the costs so we wouldn't lose money on the bowl game? I forget where I read this though...
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

This problem is easy to resolve. Bring back Coach O'Leary as Head Coach and then no one owes anyone anything.

Go Jackets!
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

Wreckless, thanks for the information.

I thought I read somewhere the negotiations and settlements were ongoing and the administration could not release any information regarding the litigation.

Do you remember any information similar to this?

Father Time
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

Y Jacket about summed it up for me .Of course you could really dump this back on Braine for getting in a lose/lose contract in which we lose our head coach(that then caused a tremendous amount of up- heaval) and still do not get ANY recompense- even though I'm sure Tech would have had to pay if WE had broken the contract.
What's $1.5m when you got money flowing in from our 7th straight bowl game?(one that again we probably will not break even on) And a sexy gold chair-back section that is making the AA rich.
Life is good.
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

Jerry, I don't believe that will ever happen. Personally, I would not want it to happen. There were some things I liked about O'Leary, but some things I did not like.

I would rather for him to get his second chance at UCF.

Father Time
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

TechF. I take it that you are a lawyer and your speciality is business law, I also take it that you have read both the ND and the GT contracts also the contract with GOL that states he could come back if other jobs don't pan out after he resigns. Some how or another I think GT would have balked at this type contract with GOL. But then again what do I know I'm only a lowly engineer. Hey I just noticed that I have passed the 1000 post mark. Gees I'll catch up to Beeware soon.
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

Never said I was a GO fan. I'm not.

I'm a Tech fan and only want what's best for Tech. Airing dirty laundry and entering in lawsuits against former coaches or other institutions come at a cost, and I suspect that the GTAA has decided that cost exceeds 1.5 million.

On a seperate note. Guys that brag that how much they post has anything to do with being right is insane. Number of posts is not a status symbol to me. I don't know how it could be.

Some of the dumbest people on this board post incessantly. Some of the brightest people on this board post quite infrequently. And vice versa for both.

I once saw a sign at my bosses office that said, "The person with the least information usually has the strongest opinion."

And no. I'm not an attorney, but I have taken two business law classes as required by my college degree. I also have a Business Management and Economics degree to go with my Biology degree.

I am a business person that is employed by a healthcare company, but I also own my own land management company and I have spent a considerable time managing multiple businesses and have reveiwed multiple contracts for a living.

It's pretty basic stuff.

I very much respect engineers, by the way. No reason to put words in my mouth.

The fact that you are an engineer is seperate from, and in spite of, the fact that you don't know what you are talking about on this particular matter. One has nothing to do with the other and I publicly acknowledge that at this very moment.
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

Originally posted by ncjacket:
As you say, basic business law. My assumptions then would be as follows:

1) O'Leary owed GT if he leaves to take another job.

2) ND agreed to pay the buyout for O'Leary. I would bet they have no agreement with GT, it's between them and O'Leary.

3) When O'Leary resigned, ND said you're not our coach so we aren't paying anything.

4) GT's recourse is with O'Leary, who said basically, I don't have another college coaching job so I'm not paying.

Seems to me it's up to GT to sue O'Leary. We can always sue both O'Leary and ND and see what a judge and/or jury decides, but I'm not sure O'Leary can legally shift his responsibility to ND.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">That is correct. The contract was between GT and GOL. ND was third party to this contract. GT can not sue ND under contract law no matter what ND told GOL.
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

Originally posted by Jerry the Jacket:
This problem is easy to resolve. Bring back Coach O'Leary as Head Coach and then no one owes anyone anything.

Go Jackets!
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Do you have any respect for GT as a school at all? That's an assinine statement.
 
Re: Answer On the O\'Leary 1.5 million

As for the 1.5 million i have no clue. However, I can't beleive that O'Leary accepted the job. He left Tech w/out warning and our recruiting suffered greatly from it. Then it comes up that he lied on his resume, thereafter getting fired from ND. Then he got a decent job from the vikings from the new HC Mike Tice. Probably nobody else would have given him that good of a job...other than TIce.

Then eventhough Tice pretty much saved his coaching career, he turns his back on him and goes to coach Central Florida. All the while his team is trying to make the playoffs.

To me O'Leary is a very inconsiderate person who isnt grateful for any favors ppl have for him. He has no loyalty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top