PCM Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Wow. The editors at USCHO are on the ball tonight. I've got your link right here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diggler Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 You could've given us the scoop, gramps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Herald Story on Suit I'm not sure I understand this one. "We have been working diligently to review all the claims," Brocker said, "but there's no final decision at this time about the issues or the venue." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 You could've given us the scoop, gramps. Sure. If I wanted to scoop myself. That's why sudo-reporting is best left to the unprofessionals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Herald Story on Suit I'm not sure I understand this one. Here's my translation. "We have been working diligently to review all the claims" means "We haven't decided whether or not to throw in the kitchen sink." "...there's no final decision at this time about the issues or the venue" means "do we want the biggest ball of wax or the strongest ball of wax? And where is the best place to put the ball of wax?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeauxSioux Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Here's my translation. "We have been working diligently to review all the claims" means "We haven't decided whether or not to throw in the kitchen sink." "...there's no final decision at this time about the issues or the venue" means "do we want the biggest ball of wax or the strongest ball of wax? And where is the best place to put the ball of wax?" Thanks for the convolution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Thanks for the convolution. No charge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobIwabuchiFan Posted September 28, 2006 Author Share Posted September 28, 2006 I am extremely happy with the State and the University going forward on this, but I would feel extremely secure if the legislation was also being followed up on to cover us in the situations where the court is skewed towards the politically correct crowd. If we get this processed in court, there is nothing stopping them from countersuing in a higher court, but if the legislation is passed it gets extremely hard for the courts to overturn legislation especially if its based on precedent. Just my 2 cents... BOBIWABUCHIFAN PS PCM, nice work grasshopper! I love it when common sense and logic prevail over BS PC!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hayduke Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Wow. The editors at USCHO are on the ball tonight. I've got your link right here. "The fundamental irrationality of calling what we do hostile and abusive - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Dr. Kupchella was asked by a WDAZ reporter about the cost of the NC$$ ligation to date. He stated what he knew about the costs were just that the bills are being paid as they come in. He went on to say that there is "a pledge to cover the costs what ever it takes". So, to those NDSU fans who are worried about UND's ability to pay for the lawsuit at the expense of moving on to D1, no se precupe, don't worry your little pointy heads about it any more more. It's covered, "whatever it takes". God, I love UND, it's sports, it's alumi and benefactors!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyMom Posted September 29, 2006 Share Posted September 29, 2006 Dr. Kupchella was asked by a WDAZ reporter about the cost of the NC$$ ligation to date. He stated he did know what he costs were just that the bills are being paid as they come in. He went on to say that there is "a pledge to cover the costs what ever it takes". So, to those NDSU fans who are worried about UND's ability to pay for the lawsuit at the expense of moving on to D1, no se precupe, don't worry your little pointy heads about it any more more. It's covered, "whatever it takes". God, I love UND, it's sports, it's alumni and benefactors!!! UND peeps are the best peeps on earth! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommiejo Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 UND peeps are the best peeps on earth! AMEN TO THAT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem will hold a news conference at 10 a.m. this morning in the Betty Engelstad Sioux Center. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem will hold a news conference at 10 a.m. this morning in the Betty Engelstad Sioux Center. How appropriate that the Black-Eyed Peas' "Let's Get It Started" just came on the radio ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem will hold a news conference at 10 a.m. this morning in the Betty Engelstad Sioux Center. (sniff) (sniff) (s-s-s-s-sniff) I love the smell of lawsuit in the morning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 The lawsuit has been filed in District Court here in Grand Forks. I only caught part of the report on KNOX, but it sounds like 3 different counts. The NC$$ has approximately 20 days to respond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 I'll have a story with more details about the lawsuit later today on USCHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdahl Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 Sioux sue - Grand Forks Herald Stenehjem said his office would seek a preliminary, then a permanent injunction against the nickname prohibition while the case is in litigation. He said the injunction issue could possibly be decided within the month but the larger issues of the lawsuit would take much longer and likely end in an appeal.He said the lawsuit alleged three major points: -- The NCAA broke a contract with its members by imposing the nickname mandate. -- The NCAA broke a good faith covenant by imposing the mandate. -- The NCAA unlawfully restrained trade in North Dakota by imposing the mandate. "Their actions in imposing this put us in an impossible economic position, in violation of North Dakota antitrust laws," Stenehjem said, referring to the final point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mksioux Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 I must say, I was surprised by the venue. I thought they would file in federal court. I assume the NCAA will remove the case to federal court. Anyone have a link to the complaint? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 I assume the NCAA will remove the case to federal court. Based on what Stenehjem said this morning, my understanding is that the case will stay in state court until one side loses and then appeals it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 Based on what Stenehjem said this morning, my understanding is that the case will stay in state court until one side loses and then appeals it. Most likely, the NC$$ will make a motion to remove the case to federal court, based on the "diversity" of the parties. UND is a "resident" of NoDak, and the NC$$ is a resident of probably Indiana, so "diversity" would probably apply. This presumes there is no choice of venue provision in the agreement(s) UND has with the NC$$. However, if removal is granted, the case will probably still be held in the local federal court, probably in Fargo. I would guess one of the reasons why UND filed in GF, was to demonstrate the seriousness of their suit, and to start with home ice advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 .....start with home ice advantage. I like that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!! Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 Sioux sue - Grand Forks Herald I like to see that they are going all the way and declaring that the NCAA is wrong in their banning of nicknames; not just saying that they (NCAA) are inconsistent. Go Sioux! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.