Do you mean to suggest that the following article might not actually describe the ordeal of a boy trapped in a refrigerator who ate his own foot?
Refrigerator Foot.jpg
Sorry for taking this thread (further) off topic, but I couldn't pass up the opportunity to reference one of my favorite gags from Airplane!
Zion may have some legal issues at the moment, but at least he'll never have to worry about refrigerator-induced self-cannibalism -- there ain't no refrigerator on the planet that could contain Zion!
Can one of our legal experts weigh in on this decision by a Florida judge to require Zion to respond to the interrogatories?
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/29255403/judge-says-zion-williamson-answer-questions-oath-improper-benefits-duke
“Coach said no 3s.” - Zion on The Block
I don't know the details of that case that well, but the scope of civil discovery is generally pretty broad, and discovery responses will be compelled if there is any arguable relevance to the claims. Moreover, discovery rulings are generally not appealable, so it is doubtful this decision will be reconsidered.
The anti-Zion team has an interesting argument. The NC regulations which were broken in signing Zion pertain to amateur athletes. Since Zion (allegedly) accepted benefits, he was not an amateur athlete and thus not protected by the NC regulations. The contract signed by Zion would then be binding. It seems to me a non-frivolous argument that deserves discovery.
So they asked him to admit to various things (accepting benefits/pay/etc.) and the Judge said he has to respond - is that basically what is going on at this point? Can his response be "I admit no such thing!"*?
*Because, by God, you will have to prove any of the allegations you are making and they didn't happen anyway.
I apologize for not having time to go through the whole thread, but am I correct that he signed with a group and then decided not long after to go with another agency?
Yes.
Yes. You can deny requests for admissions if they are not true. Typically, an RFA will have the request followed by two choices on the next line: Admit:__ or Deny:__, and then you put an X on the appropriate line. In certain situations, you may be required to provide an explanation with your denial.
tl;dr version: Zion signed a marketing contract with Ford's agency shortly after declaring for the draft. He later canceled (or tried to) that contract and signed a deal with mega-agency CAA. Ford says Zion owes her $100M for breaching the contract. Zion says the contract was illegal and both void as a matter of law and voidable at his option. There is a law in NC and FL (most states, actually) that has specific requirements for agency/marketing contracts signed by student athletes, but the law only applies if the athlete was eligible for future NCAA competition at the time of signing. Since Ford and the contract did violate the statute, she needs to establish that Zion was not eligible for future NCAA competition when he signed the contract, which is why she is sending discovery requests about recruiting violations.
According to this, he is appealing and is expected (at least by this guy) to win the appeal:Annotation 2020-06-03 131344.jpg
The folks over on Inside Carolina know for a fact that Zion (and many others) were paid by Duke in general and Coach K specifically. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that a university with an international reputation and also the GOAT would risk all of that to bribe a teenager to play basketball. I wonder if the Board of Trustees and the President approved this? If so, shame, shame, shame.
My reponse was about the inability to appeal but here is another tweet by the same guy saying he things the appeal will fall in Zion's favor.
Annotation 2020-06-03 131344.jpg
It involved a Ponzi scheme that Sergei fell victim to.
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...edorov-others/
How any of that relates to Zion's case, I have no idea, though I imagine the defendant in that case may have sought to depose Sergei about some sports-related matters and the appeals court ruled in Sergei's favor.
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
I have no concern should Zion have to testify - as I fully anticipate that he will confirm no improper benefits.