The dispute between the two sides stemmed from a lawsuit the Knicks filed in August against Raptors’ parent company MLSE and the team. The Knicks filed a lawsuit, saying that a Raptors employee had taken proprietary team information with him before leaving the Knicks organization and starting a new job in Toronto. The Knicks alleged that Silver was too conflicted, and too close to Raptors president Larry Tannenbaum, to be able to rule objectively on their issue.
“The Raptors and MLSE are pleased that the court agreed that this should be resolved by the NBA, which we have maintained is the proper forum for disputes of this nature,” a Raptors spokesperson said. “We hope this brings this case closer to resolution.”
Federal Judge Jessica GL Clark ruled Friday that the disagreement was better for the NBA and should be handled by league-led arbitration rather than in the Southern District of New York, where the lawsuit was filed. Clark said the arbitration clause of the NBA constitution gives Silver jurisdiction over disagreements between NBA teams.
“Whether this dispute is arbitrable is a decision that rests with the NBA Commissioner, not the courts,” Clark wrote in his decision.
The Knicks filed a lawsuit in August because the franchise said that when Ikechukwu Azotam left the Knicks, where he worked, he provided “scouting reports, play frequency reports, a preparation book and links to third-party licensed software”. Had taken more than 3,000 files with him. Landed a job with the Raptors last summer as a video coordinator. The Knicks also named Raptors coach Darko Rajakovic, Raptors player development coach Noah Lewis and 10 unnamed John Does as defendants.
Team lawyers alleged that Azotam did this at Rajakovic’s direction and to help him adjust to his new job.
The Raptors and the defendants denied the allegations. In a rebuttal filing, he said the Knicks filed their lawsuit for public attention. He also expressed the possibility of retaliatory action.
An MSG Sports spokesperson said, “We were the victims of the theft of proprietary and confidential files in clear violation of criminal and civil law and we are continuing to evaluate our legal options.” “We do not believe it is appropriate for the commissioner of the NBA to pass judgment on a matter involving his boss, the president of the NBA, and his team.”
The Raptors said their dispute should be decided by Silver and is governed by the NBA Constitution. Nix said it should be heard in federal court. The NBA stayed out and waited for the judge to determine who should hear the teams’ issues.
Federal Judge Clark ruled that the league’s constitution gave Silver and the league this right.
“This case is about an NBA competition and appears to fall squarely within the scope of the cheating controversy, which the NBA Constitution provides the Commissioner with exclusive jurisdiction to win,” Clark wrote. “The Court does not need to consider the hypothetical limits of the arbitration clause of the NBA Constitution as this case falls squarely within its intended scope. The Knicks’ suggestion that a reasonable team would not view the current controversy in any way as a violation of the NBA Constitution is absurd.”
Clark also rejected the Knicks’ allegations that Silver was unqualified to hear the dispute because he was too close to Tannenbaum.
Tanenbaum is chairman of the NBA’s Board of Governors and works closely with Silver, and the league’s owner also serves as semi-boss to Silver.
But Clark said it was not a compelling enough case. The cases Nix cited to prove possible bias are ineligible, Clark said. The judge also said that if Silver was indeed biased against the Raptors, his court would still have the authority to review and overturn Silver’s decision.
“The attack on Commissioner Silver’s qualifications to mediate this dispute is premature,” Clark wrote. “It’s like complaining about umpiring before the game even starts.”
essential reading
(Photo: David Dow/NBAE via Getty Images)
Discover more from news2source
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
