The short version of NASL's response is simply that if there were legitimate issues of fact for the jury at the summary judgment stage (where the court rejected USSF/MLS' motion), there still are here. 2/
That's a fair response, since the JMOL is basically a SJ motion made after the case is presented to the jury rather than before. Of course, parties make both motions all the time, but evidence can break down at trial and, in this case, a different judge denied the SJ motion. 3/
NASL argues that there was evidence of concerted action (e.g., USSF treated NASL differently on waivers, only began enforcing PLS when NASL needed them, SUM agreement, and Gulati hand-picked the board members). 4/
NASL also notes that its request for a three year runway was denied on the spot by Gulati without a vote, which is a little different than the USSF/MLS version of how this went down 6/
Comments