 |
[RC] The Drug Rule in Court - katswig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxTruman said: The AERC BOD has been sued in the past over how it enforces the rules. One over a sore back issue back in the early 90's. I believe it lost. My only recollection of the AERC being sued by a competitor for its enforcement of the rules and application of sanctioning to said competitor was the Les Carr issue with Astro Aeries and tack sores (I believe) back in the early 90's. And while I don?t know the whole story, my understanding from what was published in the Endurance News is that the first "ruling" of the courts was "...courts prefer not to involve themselves in the administration of amateur sports" and then the case went away because it was settled out of court with part of the negotiated settlement a gag order on anybody who knew anything about it telling anybody about it. So no, the AERC did not "lose" the court case; it never came to trial. The rule is unclear, the rule is imprecise, the rule is vague and if the AERC gets aggressive about enforcing it the way it stands - someone just might own them. .... I am very surprised Trilby didn't sue them back to the stone age. She could have owned them - and maybe even a few of the directors. She was a lot nicer than I would have been. I am not in the least surprised that Trilby didn't sue. Even had she won (which she probably wouldn't have because courts still prefer not to involve themselves in the administration of amateur sports) very little would be gained in "winning." Actually, very little is to be gained by suing at all, even if it never comes to trial and is settled out of court. I will bet you dollars to donuts that Les Carr will never be inducted into the AERC Hall of Fame, since people will have a long memory of just how "un-nice" he can be (like Truman also appears to be confessing to be). The courts didn't want to hear David Boggs's case against the IAHA either. Despite the fact that for him it most definitely was NOT an amateur sport and the IAHA, in essence, took away his livelihood (not just his hobby) for five years. And the court?s attitude in that case was not that they didn't think his case had merit (they were uninterested in the merits of his case); they didn't want to interfere with the ability of the ruling body to administer the sport. In essence what the courts said was, "if you didn?t want to play by the IAHA's rules, you shouldn't have played at IAHA events." And the only thing the IAHA was denying him (or could deny him) was the ability to play at IAHA events (which, presumably since he was suing the IAHA over the way they administered the rules, he didn't want to anyway :)). The courts would likely say exactly the same thing to anybody who wanted to sue the AERC. One of the things that every participant accepts when going to an AERC ride is that they agree to play by the AERC's rules...and however the AERC chooses to administer them. And "the courts" fully understand that. Besides which, Truman aside?, most of the people in the AERC are generally nice people. Being sued for its enforcement of the rules is the least of the AERC's problems. kat Orange County, Calif. p.s. I don't know Truman at all, but I suspect that despite his assertion to the contrary, he is also nice enough not to try to drag a bunch of well-meaning volunteer amateurs into court over something as inconsequential as the outcome of an endurance ride. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|