It is called being given an immediate release after you give notice. Happens when you are privy to sensitive information (such as recruiting scoop) so your employer cuts you loose early. Anybody think Les Miles wanted Chavis around his recruits?

Had it happen to me and I got to start a new job early and draw 2 paychecks for a while. If Chavis worded his resignation letter correctly he is golden.

The LSU black eye just keeps getting bigger as this drags on.

There is not a dispute between A&M and Chavis. A&M has already agreed to pay any buyout penalty due to LSU. It is part of his contract with A&M.

That said, he gone.

quote:

---

There is not a dispute between A&M and Chavis. A&M has already agreed to pay any buyout penalty due to LSU. It is part of his contract with A&M.

That said, he gone.

---

You know that how??? I haven't seen the pleadings, have you??

quote:

---

Hmm, considering Brick Haley left LSU a few weeks after signing a new contract with a buy-out clause, I assumed Alleva had settled with Chavis. Apparently, I was wrong.

A&M being named a defendant is a curious move in some respects, as A&M was not a party to the contract at issue. (in the Wickline mess, tu isn't a party, yet.)


Unless there is some reference in his contract with A&M to the LSU contract and an indemnification clause. In which case, adding A&M makes sense for both subject matter and jurisdictional reasons.

---

LSU doesn't care that Brick went to Texas. They just didn't want him to come to A&M. Also I believe you are correct on your 3rd paragraph. I'm sure this was agreed to as part of the contract negotiations.

quote:

---

quote:

---

There is not a dispute between A&M and Chavis. A&M has already agreed to pay any buyout penalty due to LSU. It is part of his contract with A&M.

That said, he gone.

---

You know that how??? I haven't seen the pleadings, have you??

---

http://justiceweb.co.brazos.tx.us/proxy/Scripts/UVlink.isa/bodreaux/WEBSERV/CivilSearch?action%253Dview%26track%253D208752

Not sure that direct link will work but it's on justiceweb. Disclaimer: I have not read chavis/a&m contract or the entire petition, was basing my opinion off of Youngkins quote from article that basically said that.

Edit: Just scanned petition on my phone in the car and basically confirms what I said. A&M has committed to pay liquidated damages that may be due between LSU and Chavis but A&M refuses to tender payment as both Chavis & A&M dispute that LSU is owed anything.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

A&M is in the suit so that the case can be heard in Brazos County, rather than having to bring it in Louisiana.

---

Also eliminates the need to bring the case to Federal Court, as Chavis and A&M are located in the same state.

---

ergo, the reference to Brazos County, where there are no federal courts.

---

Would you you too shut the **** up with that law talk.

---

So... who else was supposed to shut up?

Better Call Saul

A&M coach suing A&M, wait for the jokes to come guys.

Where's that thread with all the fictional attorneys?

I think Hennesey made it....

quote:

---

I am betting A&M consented to the suit. And I hope LSU files a notice of removal. The Houston Federal Courthouse is literally across the street from my office. I'd go to that hearing.

---

Where you work

Welcome to the new age. Now that's how you build a rivalry.

Billy Jack Youngkin.....Gilmer Buckeye. Send them home empty handed Bill with Upshur county touffe on their face!!

Real black eye for contracts

So much legal fail in this thread. Just because your brother failed out of law school, it doesn't mean you understand the law. Plus, reading stuff on the Internet =\ legal knowledge.

quote:

---

So much legal fail in this thread. Just because your brother failed out of law school, it doesn't mean you understand the law. Plus, reading stuff on the Internet =\ legal knowledge.

---

Then why don't you inform us wtf is going on smart guy.

LSU sues:

quote:

---

LSU also is suing Chavis for breaching his contract by communicating with Texas A&M without LSU's permission, and the school says it is entitled to damages from the "reputational harm caused by Chavis' conduct."

The school wants a jury trial, as opposed to Chavis' request for declaratory judgment (requiring a judge only).

If LSU is not awarded the $400,000, the school is asking the court to give it compensation for "loss or departure of other coaching staff" as well as loss of "potential recruits" and "the potential adverse effect on ticket sales."

Also, if LSU is not awarded the buyout, the school wants money for the relocation of his replacement, Kevin Steele, plus lawyers' fees for negotiating Steele's contract.

In his suit, Chavis also lists A&M as a defendant because the school agreed to "provide (Chavis') obligations (from) the LSU contract. They will be responsible for that if there are any," A&M's lawyer told The Houston Chronicle.

In his suit, Chavis says that once he started at A&M (on Feb. 12), the Aggies became liable for any payments owed to LSU. Chavis claims in the suit that A&M is willing to pay LSU but doesn't believe Chavis violated his contract.

---

Link

I'm not speaking in regards to substantive matters. I'm talking about procedural and jurisdictional issues. I have no idea what is going on in regards to the underlying suit.

quote:

---

I'm not speaking in regards to substantive matters. I'm talking about procedural and jurisdictional issues. I have no idea what is going on in regards to the underlying suit.

---

Jurisdiction is easy.

Chavis now resides in TX. He is suing A&M, which is also in Texas. LSU, another party, does not reside in Texas, but does business in Texas (including plays games against A&M).

This establishes personal jurisdiction - whether the court has personal jurisdiction over all defendants. A case is easily made that this is correct as both defendants either reside or do business in the state.

Subject matter jurisdiction is also no brainer as the BCJD can handle this case.

Procedurally, I will let others address that.

Page 2 of this has details on the jurisdiction
http://media.graytvinc.com/documents/john_chavis_lawsuit.pdf

Chavis filed for declaratory judgment. Simple contract interpretation by a judge, no jury.

Alleva has sued for everything but the kitchen sink, claiming damages far in excess of the contractual buy-out. If there was ever any doubt that Alleva has a screw loose and is incapable of behaving in a rational business like manner, it's gone now.

Who would want to work for a man like that???

Suit should be settled as fast as Mike Leach's suit against Texas Tech.

Jeeeeez Louise, this old army does like how this coaching job has started off. Hope he doesn't sue KS too!

Isn't LSU strapped for cash right now? That might have something to do with it.

quote:

---

Chavis filed for declaratory judgment. Simple contract interpretation by a judge, no jury.

Alleva has sued for everything but the kitchen sink, claiming damages far in excess of the contractual buy-out. If there was ever any doubt that Alleva has a screw loose and is incapable of behaving in a rational business like manner, it's gone now.

Who would want to work for a man like that???

---

Louisiana style politics and posturing. Screw the outsiders if you can.

Seems king if shady to me.

quote:

---

Jeeeeez Louise, this old army does like how this coaching job has started off. Hope he doesn't sue KS too!

---

I guess you do not actually understand what has happened, do you? This is NOTHING.

quote:

---

Seems king if shady to me.

---

Here, straight from A&M:

""There is not a dispute between Coach Chavis and Texas A&M. The University stands behind its commitment to Coach Chavis to pay any buyout due to LSU. The issue is that Texas A&M disagrees with LSU that any buyout payment is actually due.""

quote:

---

If LSU is not awarded the $400,000, the school is asking the court to give it compensation for "loss or departure of other coaching staff" as well as loss of "potential recruits" and "the potential adverse effect on ticket sales."

Also, if LSU is not awarded the buyout, the school wants money for the relocation of his replacement, Kevin Steele, plus lawyers' fees for negotiating Steele's contract.

---

I fully understand pleading in the alternative (if you don't buy my first cause of action, how about this one?) but how do you assess a monetary amount for "loss or departure of other coaching staff" or the "potential adverse effect on ticket sales"??? And the loss of "potential recruits"???

Very dumb. Very Ken Starr-esque Baylor BS.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Seems king if shady to me.

---

Here, straight from A&M:

""There is not a dispute between Coach Chavis and Texas A&M. The University stands behind its commitment to Coach Chavis to pay any buyout due to LSU. The issue is that Texas A&M disagrees with LSU that any buyout payment is actually due.""

---

I hope you are right!

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Seems king if shady to me.

---

Here, straight from A&M:

""There is not a dispute between Coach Chavis and Texas A&M. The University stands behind its commitment to Coach Chavis to pay any buyout due to LSU. The issue is that Texas A&M disagrees with LSU that any buyout payment is actually due.""

---

I hope you are right!

---

This is the Internet. As a user of the Internet on a message board forum, I am right by default!

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Seems king if shady to me.

---

Here, straight from A&M:

""There is not a dispute between Coach Chavis and Texas A&M. The University stands behind its commitment to Coach Chavis to pay any buyout due to LSU. The issue is that Texas A&M disagrees with LSU that any buyout payment is actually due.""

---

I hope you are right!

---

This is the Internet. As a user of the Internet on a message board forum, I am right by default!

---

schwiiiiiiiing. This old army got it.

quote:

---

John Chavis is in a dispute with LSU over the 400K penalty in his contract. A&M is also refusing to pay the penalty, as is Chavis, because they both say LSU is not entitled to it.

If Chavis had filed his suit only against LSU, he likely would have had to file it in Louisiana, and it would have been moved to Federal Court, because they are two parties located in opposite states (with over 75K in damages).

So, Chavis adds A&M for two reasons, one, so he can file in Brazos County, where A&M is located, at at the state district court level, and two, if for some reason it went all the way to bench trial (I assume no jury trial in contract disputes) and he wins, A&M would be held in judgment to pay the 400K fee.

But I doubt any of that happens.

---

Thank you.

Don't worry about Chavis and A&M. This is a friendly suit between those parties. We're fine.

Alleva is letting emotion dictate here, and it shows.

LSU can stuff it for they are not at all honorable. They broke a contract and did not pay. Also this is more sour grapes.

Chavis is going to destroy LSU's offense. Book it. He mad.