Originally Posted by
Snowball
the language and aguments if affirmed, invalidate the move to Vegas, making it vulnerable to another case
or a ruling that cancels the move. It doesn't matter that in this case the City is seeking damages only, say
they are awarded 500 million dollars...the basis being that NFL broke their own rules and damaged Oakland..
if that is affirmed there can be all sorts of repurcussions such as an additional case in another court to invalidate
the move, or a stay against the move right in the fifth district court.
It can happen is all I'm saying. Until then, nobody knows where Raiders are playing next season.
Davis would prefer Oakland but that means he is essentially paying Oakland's legal fees by leasing the stadium.
This case has potentialities. Let's say the court agrees the NFL's move was invalid and illegal.
Then it awards the money to Oakland. Thus the precedent that the move was illegal opens up another case to stop it,
or the judge may stop it as part of the ruling, or in comments may encourage such.
"The defendants brazenly violated federal antitrust law and the league’s own policies when they boycotted Oakland as a host city,” Parker said. “The Raiders’ illegal move lines the pockets of NFL owners and sticks Oakland, its residents, taxpayers and dedicated fans with the bill. The purpose of this lawsuit is to hold the defendants accountable and help to compensate Oakland for the damages the defendants’ unlawful actions have caused and will cause to the people of Oakland.”