Keker Team Wins Arbitration, Forcing Warriors to Pay for Oracle Arena Renovations
An arbitrator found that the Bay Area's NBA team, which is set to decamp from Oakland to new digs in San Francisco next season, must continue to pay debts incurred in the mid-90s to renovate its current home, Oracle Arena.
October 29, 2018 at 05:55 PM
2 minute read
The Golden State Warriors can't win 'em all.
An arbitrator sided against the Bay Area NBA team in its dispute with the City of Oakland and the County of Alameda over debt incurred to renovate Oracle Arena, the team's current home in Oakland.
With the team set to move across the Bay for new digs in San Francisco next season, the team and its landlords at the Oakland-Alameda County Stadium Authority had clashed on the meaning of language in the team's lease agreement to occupy Oracle, which was originally signed in 1996. The Warriors had argued the team wasn't obligated to pay any debt remaining once the team decamps to San Francisco next year, while the Coliseum authority, represented by a team at Keker, Van Nest & Peters, argued that the team owed the full price of the renovation bill, an amount the municipalities pegged at about $55 million.
On Monday, following a three-day hearing in July and closing arguments in September, JAMS arbitrator Rebecca Westerfield found that the team is financially responsible for payments on the debt incurred during the renovations.
The Keker, Van Nest & Peters team representing the Coliseum Authority in its arbitration with the Warriors included Daniel Purcell, Leah Pransky, and Eduardo Santacana.
Purcell said in a brief phone interview Monday afternoon that the case seemed like an attempt by the Warriors' current ownership group, which bought the team while the current lease was pending, to “rewrite” the terms of a “clear” and “fair” deal. Purcell said his clients were grateful the arbitrator saw the case their way. “They're formidable on the basketball court,” said Purcell of the Warriors. “It can be a little bit harder to overwhelm an adversary that is well informed in a court of law.”
A representative of the team told San Jose Mercury News that the team disagreed with the decision. “Of course we are reviewing our options at this time, but as we've always said, we will fulfill any debt obligations that we owe,” the team representative said. The team was represented by counsel at Morrison & Foerster including James Bennett and Joshua Hill Jr.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllIn Lawsuit, Ex-Google Employee Says Company’s Layoffs Targeted Parents and Others on Leave
6 minute readMorrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
Trending Stories
- 1As 'Red Hot' 2024 for Legal Industry Comes to Close, Leaders Reflect and Share Expectations for Next Year
- 2Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 3Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 4Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 5Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250