re: Whoever decided "hey lets try to job BK out of his contract" needs to be sent to pasture

quote:

---

What other meaning does “at any time prior to its expiration” have?

---

Well, first, let's examine the whole clause rather than just a few words of it. The whole clause says:

quote:

---

This Agreement may be terminated for "cause" by LSU, acting through the President, at any time prior to its expiration, upon written notice to Employee.

---

The clause says the Agreement may be terminated for "cause" at any time prior to its expiration. It does NOT say "they can send the notice any time before the end of the contract expiration." In fact, Section 11.A.1 does not say anything about notice.

To the contrary, the timing of the termination notice is governed by section 11.A.2-4. Indeed, section 11.A.3 requires LSU to provide written notice of contemplated termination to Kelly before it can terminate him:

quote:

---

After the expiration of the seven-day cure period set forth above without appropriate curative actions having been taken by Employee, but prior to termination for cause, Employee shall be provided with written notice of contemplated termination and a statement of the grounds and facts in support thereof and shall have an additional seven calendar days from receipt of such notice to respond in writing and/or present documents or other written evidence to the Athletics Director.

---

quote:

---

Yeah, I'm tapping out, I don't have another round in me.

---

It's really simple.

1. LSU made the decision to separate with football head coach Brian Kelly "effective immediately."

2. LSU and Kelly entered negotiations to settle the terms of the payout.

3. During those negotiations, LSU mentioned the possibility of a "for cause" termination. (If LSU did not state the possibility of a "for cause" termination, it could immediately deny such a statement and thereby make the lawsuit moot. LSU has failed to deny the statement.)

4. Kelly filed a “declaratory judgment confirming that LSU’s termination of Coach Kelly is without cause and that Coach Kelly is entitled to receive the full liquidated damages provided for in (his contract).”

quote:

---

The agreement remains in place until terminated via a written notice to Kelly. There is no language stating a timeframe for the notice other than it has to be given before the contract expires.

---

I agree, although it seems a bit circular. The notice he refers to in 11.A.3 (written notice of contemplated termination), would need to come after the notice that triggers the cure period. The notice you are referring to appears to be the original written notice of termination at the beginning of the section, which would trigger that cure period.

I don't think it has a stated timeframe either, and I don't think the intention would be for any coach that goes through the process outlined in the contract to remain the coach...which leads me to believe he can be terminated from his position, before his employment contract is terminated.

Correct. And 11 A 2 states the termination date is the date the initial termination date is given.

Kelly just needs to wait until LSU sends him a written notice. Until then, LSU is required to pay him the contract terms… not any of the terminated clause payouts.

quote:

---

When do you think those words were first used?

---

While it is stated in the filing as Nov 10 lets assume they gave no date and I had to guess.

I wouldn't guess because it really doesn't matter IMO. I don't think LSU is in a good position to argue he wasn't fired for multiple reasons and the possible lack of authority of Woodward won't fly either. The reality is if they fired him without giving the contractually required written notice to cure/mitigate then in most instances they lost that claim. I feel extremely confident that they never gave the proper notice of firing with cause, because if they did, there is no way that they would file for this specific declaratory judgment without mentioning it and arguing it was not adequate. Don't forget Kelly employed the 5th largest firm in the WORLD for this and having litigated against Skadden multiple times, they are not going to miss this.

I say the public facts make a very strong case he was fired. The filing of that specific prayer for declaratory judgment strongly indicates firing for cause has been used in the negotiations. If it were me and my client had not been given adequate notice and cure/mitigate period I would pull out of negotiations and get the court to determine that fact. As long as the Damascus sword of for cause hangs out there the negotiations simply can't go on in good faith, the parties will be too far apart.

quote:

---

It's really simple.

---

No - I was saying I was tapping out of talking with that poster who I wasn't getting anywhere with

quote:

---

If LSU did not state the possibility of a "for cause" termination, it could be immediately deny such a statement and thereby make the lawsuit moot. LSU has failed to deny the statement

---

this is not right, it can not make the lawsuit moot by simply making a statement. And the language "failed to deny the statement" is a bit inflammatory, the lawsuit commands a more robust response than a simple denial of one of the statements included, and should not rush a response.

quote:

---

In my mind, he was verbally terminated and LSU negligent in getting written termination to him and now is playing games hoping he will panic and take their offer. He didn't.

---

Verbally terminated isn’t listed in the contract he signed.

He could argue he is still the HC since he didn’t get a written notice. Not sure how LSU would handle that.

quote:

---

I wouldn't guess because it really doesn't matter IMO.

---

I do think it matters, and Kelly's legal team is very explicit about the first time it was discussed.

quote:

---

As long as the Damascus sword of for cause hangs out there the negotiations simply can't go on in good faith, the parties will be too far apart.

---

Which brings me back to my original point, why did negotiations break down, and when was this actually first discussed? This is why I was harping on the timeline of offers and counteroffers.

If LSU made an offer during the meeting he was fired like the lawsuit says, it should have been agreed to at that time that the termination would not be with or without cause, but a mutual separation. And this may be why woodward got fired, if he failed to properly document this.

quote:

---

Don't forget Kelly employed the 5th largest firm in the WORLD for this

---

Curious, what do you think is the compensation structure? Hourly? Or will they get a portion of the settlement? In between at the moment? Seriously just wondering what you think

I agree.

He wants it clarified… I was just pointing out that the contract states it must be done via written communication to him and until that is done, this agreement is still valid. And the agreement itself doesn’t state when LSU has to send the written communication. When they do, that is the termination date. He gets paid in full until then.

Kelly could say he is still HC until getting the letter. Not sure what happens then.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If LSU did not state the possibility of a "for cause" termination, it could be immediately deny such a statement and thereby make the lawsuit moot. LSU has failed to deny the statement

---

this is not right, it can not make the lawsuit moot by simply making a statement. And the language "failed to deny the statement" is a bit inflammatory, the lawsuit commands a more robust response than a simple denial of one of the statements included, and should not rush a response.

---

My statement is correct. Kelly's lawsuit is a declaratory judgment action. It simply asks the court to confirm that LSU’s termination of Coach Kelly is without cause. LSU can make that question moot by denying that it terminated Kelly for cause.