Les alerts Bradley of impending lawsuit over contract

[SFP]

I'll second that one Da Coach! BU then should not have then responded publicly like they did. They could have been a bit more diplomatic and responded with a statement which stated that they were hoping to conduct and solve this issue in a private manner and not before a public forum. I'm not sure what they gained with their statement, unless they want to win public support. JL will always remain a legend with the BU faithful so why go there?? As I said before the admins PR moves are sometimes a complete mystery.

[TNel]

Should have been handled lawyer-to-lawyer. Lawyers have to eat, too.

[LG281]

Absolutely correct SFP & amckillip---settle it now (out of court)--pay him--and move on and bury this mess

Can't agree with this...is BU supposed to bow to anyone with a complaint to mitigate potentially bad press?

If it gets that far, the courts will determine how much of the contract should be paid.

JL will always remain a legend with the BU faithful so why go there??

Can't agree with this either...JL the PLAYER may always be a legend, but the story of JL the COACH (and disgruntled former employee), is a drastically different one.

In the end Jim will get what is coming to him by way of his contract...but I think BU has every right, even a responsibility, to call out things that they find questionable.

This is just business folks and whether they admit it or not...anyone who chooses to make a mountain out of this mole hill has an agenda.

[TheGuy]

In the end Jim will get what is coming to him by way of his contract...but I think BU has every right, even a responsibility, to call out things that they find questionable.

I'm still having a hard time finding what JL did as questionable. In the end, he can always fall back on the fact that BU would owe him the full amount if he didn't take a coaching job. So regardless of the coaching job he takes, BU is still paying him less than if he were sitting at home unemployed.


If they flat out came out and said there was some confusion based on how he is currently getting paid vs what they owe and the situation will be resolved, then fine, but it now sounds like they are trying to short change JL which is bad PR any way you put it.

[CubbieBear]

Can't agree with this...is BU supposed to bow to anyone with a complaint to mitigate potentially bad press?

If it gets that far, the courts will determine how much of the contract should be paid.

I am not a lawyer, but I suggest that IF his complaint IS a legitimate breech of contract (as it appears to be on the surface) then yes, pay and mitigate further bad press and move on. I fear that if it goes to court, the lawyers will be the winners and it will cost BU a lot more $$ AND bad publicity. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree

[Beninator]

I'll second that one Da Coach! BU then should not have then responded publicly like they did. They could have been a bit more diplomatic and responded with a statement which stated that they were hoping to conduct and solve this issue in a private manner and not before a public forum. I'm not sure what they gained with their statement, unless they want to win public support. JL will always remain a legend with the BU faithful so why go there?? As I said before the admins PR moves are sometimes a complete mystery.

Well said. I very much agree!

[Toyota12]

contract

The dispute as i read it is BU is looking at this as they are paying him to be employed at UC Davis an of course JL is trying to work it as his Bball only salary!! So it is all about big boys splitting hairs or arguing over verbage however you put it... JL IMHO is still ego driven and will do what he can to make it rough on the BU admin..Also BU has an ego at the helm that will not help matters either...

[SFP]

LG - I said that it is probably in BU's best interest to not make this into a PR battle. There really is not much to gain and a lot more to lose. I have no problems with BU trying to save money here if they believe they are right but its, "airing their dirty laundry," which I have an issue with. If I was in charge I'd take the high road on this one! Can you tell me just one thing that BU has to gain by fighting this in a public forum?

[Mikovio]

What is with this fear everyone seems to have with getting "sued?" It's ridiculous. People and organizations get sued all the time, and courts throw out lawsuits all the time. Do you cut a check everytime you're handed a summons? I hope not. It would be completely irresponsible, and arguably a breach of her fiduciary duty, for Glasser to do that without exploring Bradley's legal options. Are there a lot of administrations out there who would just pay whatever is demanded (like when Michigan paid millions to WV after hiring away RichRod)? Yeah, and that doesn't make it any less dumb.

Settling to save in legal fees is fine. But if there's $400,000 in dispute you don't cut a check to save maybe $10k in legal fees. That's cutting off your nose to spite your face. Settlement is also not possible if one side won't budge, as Les seems to indicate he would not in his letter.

Les COULD NOT have just sat at home for 3 years and collect the full contractual amount. That would be a breach of his duty to mitigate damages, which is implied by law in every contract.

I find it easy to believe it is UC-Davis policy to structure coaching contracts so that it provides for separate coaching and lecturing salaries. I have a much, much harder time believing it's UC-D policy to have salaries double after 3 years. I think any judge would find that peculiar.

UC-Davis did nothing illegal to my knowledge. The duty to mitigate damages is one that Les owed to Bradley. If indeed Les violated that duty, he could be the one left holding the bag.

I have serious differences with Glasser, that hit very close to home. But she has a sound legal basis for contesting this and the Kent State suits, and given that, it would be irresponsible not to and pay in the neighborhood of a million dollars because ignorant people out there think it's so terrible to get sued and don't understand the law.

[TheGuy]

Les COULD NOT have just sat at home for 3 years and collect the full contractual amount. That would be a breach of his duty to mitigate damages, which is implied by law in every contract.

While true, it is also possible that he was turned down for another position before taking the UC Davis job which is why he probably made that statement. So he could have had the ability to claim that he at least made an attempt at some point or another and this is all he could get.

[Mikovio]

While true, it is also possible that he was turned down for another position before taking the UC Davis job which is why he probably made that statement. So he could have had the ability to claim that he at least made an attempt at some point or another and this is all he could get.

Well his attempt to find new employment must be reasonable, and I don't think applying for one or two positions would be sufficient.

This may be all he could get, but the issue then becomes whether his contract negotiations were reasonable. I don't know the answer, but the salary doubling after 3 years is curious on its face IMO.

[Da Coach]

I am not a lawyer, but I don't see any way a court could force Jim Les to take less than what the contract guarantees, just because they did not think he did enough to search for new employment. Your example of a renter losing a tenant is not comparable, since it was Bradley that severed his employment. JL did not walk out on the contract. I do not think the resolution of this issue will depend on how hard JL searched for a new job.
There are numerous examples of fired coaches simply sitting out and collecting the rest of their compensation before they ever seek another job, including Bradley's coach previous to JL, and one of our current assistants.

[Mikovio]

I am not a lawyer, but I don't see any way a court could force Jim Les to take less than what the contract guarantees, just because they did not think he did enough to search for new employment. Your example of a renter losing a tenant is not comparable, since it was Bradley that severed his employment. JL did not walk out on the contract. I do not think the resolution of this issue will depend on how hard JL searched for a new job.
There are numerous examples of fired coaches simply sitting out and collecting the rest of their compensation before they ever seek another job, including Bradley's coach previous to JL, and one of our current assistants.

The law implies a duty on the part of the non-breaching party to make a reasonable attempt to mitigate (or set-off) damages, if possible.

My example is comparable. In every contract breach you have a breaching party and non-breaching party. Both Bradley and the tenant breached the contract, and both Les and the landlord, as non-breaching parties, are due the damages which flow from the breach. But they also have a duty to mitigate those damages, and that means seeking a new tenant to fill the space for the landlord and seeking new employment for Les.

The reason for the duty is obvious. Without the duty to mitigate damages in contract law, the non-breaching party gets a windfall.

I don't doubt that others have been paid the remainder of their contract without dispute. Everyone is perfectly entitled to ignore their legal rights and waste money by paying what they don't owe. If past administrations did this maybe they were lazy, I don't know. Fear of litigation, got bad advice, didn't ask for advice, or it could be the size of this contract. I don't know exactly how much Les was getting paid by Bradley, but it's possible that there is well over $500,000 in dispute here, so maybe they were picking their battles.

[Braves4Life]

Bradley's Side of the Story

Bradley official: We're treating Les fairly

http://www.pjstar.com/opinions/forum/x1498054649/Forum-Bradley-official-Were-treating-Les-fairly

Contrary to the insinuations in former Bradley University basketball coach Jim Les's email, dated July 7, to Bradley trustees, other individuals, and me, Bradley University has honored his contract and will continue to do so until it expires on May 31, 2014.

Bradley has a responsibility to evaluate Jim Les' compensation arrangement with the University of California-Davis, which impacts our contract with him, and determine what adjustments, if any, of Bradley's payments to Les are legally appropriate. Bradley's trustees expect the university's leadership to make such determinations to protect the university's interests, and we are fully supportive of their decisions and actions. Jim Les will not be underpaid by Bradley, but neither should he be overpaid.

It is in everyone's best interest to determine a fair settlement for Jim Les and the university based on the terms of his contract without litigation so that both parties can move forward without distraction.

Michel A. McCord

Chairman, Bradley University Board of Trustees

Peoria

[lefty]

I'm sure both sides believe they are in the right. I doubt they just pay so they don't receive some bad publicity. JL will always have some BU supporters...but BU will always have more. It's too bad that comes to this