The standard would be malpractice. It's not a question of whose general responsibility it is to know what or inform who. It would be fact specific, and the question would be whether the agent's performance was well-below an acceptable professional standard. Not calling the player the day before the practice to remind…

no idiot its the parole evidence rule which states that the defendant can't have evidence used against him until he's on parole (probation)

I just talked about this with my brother (he's a lawyer) and he said you're right. He thinks I was thinking about something different which deals with evidence that can last forever (the rule against perpetuity).

I think the most important part of this contract, and the reason it exists in the first place, is the fact that no one will ever want to litigate it. Lopez might sue, but do you think Redick really wants to be in court litigating a contract about an abortion? Doesn't matter what it says when it comes down to it…

Sounds like someone better review that Evidence outline before the Bar Exam . . . .

If you hurry, there's still time!

I was more concerned about the A/P privilege, but I see that (1) the financial adviser was copied on a lot of them, and (2) the headers suggest JJ may have forwarded them on to a "chanellopez@hotmail.com," both of which can waive the privilege. Still, I agree that these are not documents that you would normally find…

The emails with the attorney are clearly work product, and would never be contained in anything filed with or kept in a courthouse. Somebody stole/hacked this from Redick or the attorney. As a lawyer, that disturbs me greatly.

What I hate most about "the Internet brings out the worst in people" is the assumption that what we're seeing in mean online comments are someone's worst. You don't know that person. They could be some terra-troll-esque* asshole in real life.

This is about as unenforceable due to public policy as you can get. I'm pretty sure no Court would allow an agreement for termination of a pregnancy.

This seems like kind of a pointless article. I mean baseball had so much evidence against Braun that he actually agreed to the punishment. How can they ignore that? They are complicit if they do aren't they? Remember the '90s?

Pretty sure that's unenforcable.... at least with respect to specific performance.

This has been, by far, my favorite thing in baseball for a while now. (I'm a Cubs fan.)

I think it's worth nothing that "certain type" of NFL fan is also by far the most common NFL fan. The reality is the NFL's fanbase, while large and diverse, is also the least sophisticated.

A pretty decent writer. Not that great on tv.

I think for this argument to work, you'd have to take athletic department math at face value. Whether you do or not is obviously up to you, I don't, for a couple of reasons.

She can strike up a friendship with the "FBI took my kids" sign/constant whistle guy.

It's a battle royale between the 2 biggest scams in post-secondary education:

They don't have literal shareholders, but people are still making money off them. Being used is still being used.

You're having trouble because no one's making that argument. The argument is against "unnecessarily high budgets for non-revenue sports" - there's a difference between simply supporting a sport to ensure competitiveness, and throwing money at a loss leader.