An Avid Baseball Fan — and Veteran Delaware

FEATURE Jeffrey M. Schlerf

At Bat in Bankruptcy Court

An avid baseball fan I have seen a full array of issues put before the Delaware Bankruptcy Judges. Companies of various shapes, sizes and notoriety including Marvel Enter- — and veteran tainment,1 Napster, Zenith, Smith Corona, Montgomery Ward, Washing- Delaware bankruptcy ton Mutual, Tribune, TWA, Continental Airlines, Phoenix Steel, Tower Records and Solyndra have filed here. However, as a sports fan, and most lawyer — shares particularly a devout follower of Major League Baseball and the Philadel- phia Phillies, there has not been a case more fascinating than the LA Dodg- insights on the battle ers’ bankruptcy filing during the 2011 baseball season. over control of hortly after that filing, I was re- That first hearing was a precursor the LA Dodgers. tained as Delaware counsel to the of things to come. It was important Commissioner of Baseball, Bud for the Dodgers to immediately ob- S Selig. Our legal team was imme- tain “debtor-in-possession” financing. diately preparing for a court hearing to The team was low on liquidity and had object to proposed bankruptcy financ- various payroll obligations coming due ing negotiated by the Dodgers’ belea- at the time it filed, including amounts guered owner, Frank McCourt. Soon I due to former players including Manny was welcoming top MLB executives at Ramirez.2 At the hearing the team did our offices prior to that hearing. Dur- obtain interim approval for $60 million ing breaks at the hearing I listened as in financing from Highbridge, a Gold- Mr. Selig’s top lieutenants called him to man Sachs affiliate. discuss strategy. MLB ended up not pressing its ob-

22 DELAWARE LAWYER WINTER 2012/2013 jection but fully reserved its rights re- specific issues with McCourt relating garding final approval. The proceeding to his 2004 acquisition of the team, was a warm-up for the final hearing on By most accounts undisclosed transactions that followed approval of $150 million in total financ- involving team assets, and deficiencies ing several weeks later. Before delving the team’s situation in team operations. The League had an into that fight, some background on overriding concern that McCourt ap- McCourt’s deteriorating relationship began to unravel when parently did not have any independent with the League will be helpful. source of wealth or income other than The Dodgers were a proud franchise. McCourt and his wife the Dodgers and the team’s related real As recently as the 2008 and 2009 sea- estate assets. sons, the team experienced success, Jamie separated after MLB believed that during his tenure reaching the National League Cham- as owner, McCourt had “siphoned off” pionship Series both seasons (but los- the 2009 season more than $180 million in direct and ing to my beloved Phillies!). By most indirect cash distributions from team accounts the team’s situation began to and subsequently revenues.6 The League was concerned unravel when McCourt and his wife about the cumulative effect of that. Jamie separated after the 2009 season commenced divorce Other major areas of concern included and subsequently commenced divorce the Club’s ability to fund planned capi- proceedings. proceedings. tal expenditures, including $360 mil- As the McCourts’ marriage unrav- lion in planned renovations of Dodger eled, so did the Dodgers’ performance, Stadium.7 as they failed to make the playoffs the In April 2011, the first month of the ing revenues available for 2011. Disputes following season. The divorce proceed- new season, MLB concluded its initial with the League regarding the team’s ing languished. The media frenzy in LA investigation and announced the ap- media rights would continue. worsened over time. Stories came out pointment of a monitor, Ambassador J. MLB also asserted that during that about the McCourts’ lavish lifestyle and Thomas Schieffer. The League viewed offseason McCourt caused the Dodgers an alleged affair involving Jamie that led the Club’s situation as serious. Fan and to pay rent four months in advance to an to the divorce. But what really sensa- media scrutiny of team ownership was entity of his which owned the stadium tionalized the divorce was the revelation at its peak, while the team’s on-the-field parking lots in order to fund McCourt’s that Jamie was claiming she owned 50% performance and attendance were in marital support obligations. MLB be- of the team. More on that later, but the further decline. lieved that McCourt personally had cumulative effect of all this was instabil- Notwithstanding the Monitor’s relatively modest personal assets outside ity for the team. presence at team headquarters, he was of his Dodgers ownership in relation to As the on- and off-the-field distrac- excluded from critical decisions. First, his personal expenses and marital obli- tions from the divorce continued into a deal was announced in which a Mc- 3 the offseason after 2010, the team’s gations. Purportedly his “only” source Court entity would receive a substantial finances worsened. What surfaced in of income was $5 million per year ob- $385-million advance in exchange for press reports was a strategy by McCourt tained through lease payments made by Fox’s broadcasting rights being extend- to address that issue. One potential the Dodgers. ed for 17 years. The Commissioner’s source of liquidity was leveraging an There was not much optimism Office reviewed this new deal, and on increasingly valuable asset of profes- among the Dodgers faithful as the 2011 June 20, denied approval.8 sional sports franchises – so-called “me- season got underway, and matters only Additionally, while negotiations dia rights.” The Dodgers had negotia- worsened. On Opening Day at Dodg- with Fox took place and as the Dodgers tions with Fox Sports Net West2, LLC ers Stadium, Giants fan Brian Stow was were waiting for MLB’s decision, unbe- (“Fox”), the regional television network brutally attacked by Dodgers fans in knownst to the Monitor the team was broadcasting most of its games. The the stadium parking lot. Very negative making preparations for a momentous Dodgers would agree to an amendment publicity followed this incident. The back-up plan – a chapter 11 filing – and of their existing agreement whereby Fox team was accused of having lax security McCourt was negotiating bankruptcy would advance $25 million in fees pay- and poor lighting in their parking lots.4 financing.9 The team did file in Dela- able for the 2011 season. Criticism of McCourt as communicated ware one week after the League denied MLB had concerns with this transac- in the media reached a new low.5 approval, becoming the second team in tion (besides that it had not been sub- Relations with the League were a year to file for chapter 11 (the Texas mitted for its approval). The advance reaching a tipping point at this time. Rangers being the other). represented a large share of the Dodg- MLB had already commenced an in- With this backdrop, it would be an ers’ telecast rights fees for the 2011 sea- vestigation of the Dodgers’ manage- understatement to say relations were son (greater than 70%), thereby reduc- ment. In early 2011, MLB had raised strained between McCourt and the

WINTER 2012/2013 DELAWARE LAWYER 23 FEATURE

League as the battle over final approval approval process for the sale was not of bankruptcy financing ensued. Mc- contentious. Court had a choice of two lenders. MLB MLB argued that McCourt, however, funded the pur- was willing to provide financing as an chase by incurring a significant amount alternative to Highbridge, McCourt’s McCourt could not use of debt, much of it borne by the team preferred lender. MLB’s terms were itself. MLB anticipated this debt load clearly more favorable.10 The League bankruptcy to avoid would be reduced over time, which argued the Dodgers would not be prop- did not happen. Additionally, after the erly exercising business judgment by re- the MLB Constitution sale, assets were transferred away from fusing to accept their better offer. The the team to affiliates of McCourt. One Dodgers argued the League was seeking and various other example was the Dodgers’ parking lots control. Expedited discovery followed. being transferred to a McCourt entity A one-day trial was held before Chief contractual obligations and then leased back. 17 Another exam- Judge Kevin Gross. While generally ap- ple was the rights to sales of Dodgers proval of debtor financing is subject to entered into when tickets being transferred to a McCourt a business judgment standard, MLB ar- entity named Dodgers Tickets LLC. gued that the Dodgers were not entitled buying the team MLB contended that these transactions to that protection. Since McCourt was had not been disclosed to the league at personally subject to a $5-million fee – the time and required its approval. not previously disclosed to the Court – in 2004. These issues were percolating in the payable to Highbridge if that financing years following McCourt’s acquisition was not approved, his personal interests of the team, but as described above his “Debtors not only failed to attempt to rather than the debtor’s best interests relationship with the League started obtain unsecured financing [as required were driving the decision. MLB pointed unraveling during his divorce from his by statute], they refused to engage out that the Dodgers were seeking ap- wife Jamie.18 Things got even more Baseball in negotiations because, they proval of financing on clearly less favor- interesting when it was learned Jamie explained, Baseball has been hostile to able terms and were refusing to negoti- claimed a 50% ownership interest in the Debtors.”15 ate with the League. MLB also argued Dodgers. When the team was purchased The Judge could have stopped there, that McCourt could not use bankruptcy in 2004 the McCourts entered into a but went on to address the Dodgers’ to avoid the MLB Constitution and post nuptial agreement which, unlike view that courts typically apply a busi- various other contractual obligations other marital assets to be divided 50/50 ness judgment standard to a debtor’s se- entered into when buying the team in (at least clearly in McCourt’s view), pro- lection of its lender. The Court agreed 2004. The Dodgers disagreed.11 vided that Frank McCourt owned 100% that deference is given to the business At the conclusion of the trial, Judge of the team. decisions of directors of Delaware cor- Gross announced he was taking the During the divorce proceeding, matter under advisement and would is- porations, but then pointed to the ex- however, it came to light that there sue a prompt decision, which he did.12 ceptions to that rule, including when was a second version of the post nup- The Court’s Opinion was short and directors are not disinterested. Since tial agreement with slightly different direct. Judge Gross began his deci- McCourt had a personal stake in seeing wording which suggested that Jamie sion in gracious fashion by noting the that the Highbridge loan was approved owned half the team.19 The dispute was Dodgers’ “rich and successful history is the Dodgers’ decision was not protected approaching a trial in 2011, soon after of mythical proportions.”13 In acknowl- by the business judgment rule. There- the bankruptcy filing, when it was an- edging the “underlying feud” between fore, the Court applied the entire fair- nounced that the couple had reached a the Commissioner and McCourt, the ness standard, which it found was not settlement. Frank agreed to pay Jamie Judge added: “It is clear that Baseball met. In concluding his opinion, Judge $130 million by April 30, 2012 in ex- needs and wants the Dodgers to suc- Gross directed the team to negotiate change for her release of any interest ceed and the Debtors are best served by with MLB in good faith.16 in the team. That agreement created a maintaining Baseball’s good will and This had been an epic battle and substantial financial commitment for contributing to the important and prof- the Commissioner’s Office was pleased Frank, however, which caused MLB itable franchise group under the Com- with the result. However, disagreements even greater concern that McCourt’s missioner’s leadership.”14 between McCourt and MLB were not governance of the Dodgers was driven The Judge then cut to the chase and limited to financing. McCourt had by his personal financial situation. compared the terms of the Debtors’ fi- purchased the team in 2004 from Fox Given the relationship between nancing with MLB’s proposed terms, Entertainment Group, a subsidiary of MLB and McCourt, questions about finding the “substantial economic supe- News Corp., for approximately $421 the Dodgers’ financial stability, and the riority” of the latter. The Court found: million. From all accounts, the MLB sustained negative media coverage, the

24 DELAWARE LAWYER WINTER 2012/2013 Commissioner’s position was clear: Mc- for a mid-October trial and in an Order settlements, the Dodgers filed a mo- Court must sell the Dodgers. Accord- set forth the specific issues to be tried. tion which Fox challenged. The settle- ingly, the skirmish over financing was There had been a new development ment terms described in the motion just the beginning. Everyone knew this, in the case during that summer which at referenced the Dodgers’ media rights as including Judge Gross. first was not public knowledge. Former potentially part of a sale. Fox objected The public war between MLB and Delaware District Court Chief Judge because, among other reasons, there McCourt would worsen before peace Joseph Farnan was asked by Judge Gross were separate confidential terms be- broke out. As anticipated, the Dodgers to serve as a mediator of disputes between MLB and the Dodgers which by filed a motion for approval of “proce- tween MLB and the Dodgers.20 Judge agreement were not part of the record dures” for the marketing of their media Farnan’s involvement as a mediator “be- and not to be disclosed to other parties rights. The team wanted the Court to hind the scenes” would pay off.21 including Fox. Judge Gross approved approve essentially modifying the con- On November 1, 2011 MLB an- the MLB settlement, overruling the ob- tract between Fox and the Dodgers by nounced it had reached a global settle- jection. The larger battle between the moving up by a year the 45-day period ment with the Dodgers. Most critically, team and Fox would be over the Dodg- in which the team was required to ex- McCourt agreed to sell the Dodgers ers’ proposed media rights procedures. clusively negotiate with Fox over an ex- in an auction process. But there was a The Dodgers filed a motion for ap- tension of their agreement. Fox did not time constraint: under his settlement proval of amended procedures for mar- consent to this. with his ex-wife, McCourt had to make keting their media rights which includ- MLB filed a motion to terminate a $130-million payment by April 30, ed a modification of Fox’s exclusive ne- the Dodgers’ exclusive period to file a 2012. He would need a sale of the team gotiating rights. Due to the accelerated chapter 11 plan or alternatively compel to be approved by MLB and the Court sale process, driven by McCourt’s obli- the Club to assume all MLB-related and then close by that time. More on gations due on April 30, this proceeding agreements (which in the view of MLB, the sale later; the Dodgers still had is- had to be expedited. Interestingly, MLB could not be done because the previous sues with Fox. had agreed in its settlement to be neu- breaches thereof by McCourt could not The Dodgers’ skirmishes with Fox tral, although it would still get caught be cured). began with the MLB settlement. Since in the fray with discovery.22 As Fox and Judge Gross scheduled the matters bankruptcy requires court approval of the Dodgers prepared for trial, Judge FIREARMS? When the question arises, “What do we do with the guns?” ARTEMIS OUTFITTERS is your solution. We oﬀ er the following services: • Estate Sales, consignments, liquidations • Appraisals and evaluations and dispositions • Cleaning, repair, restoration and advice • Storage (local safekeeping). Prohibited • We also work with sporting art and persons, Estate Administration, collectible decoys probate, divorce or PFA orders

We are a full service dealer experienced with all types of ﬁ rearms, whether it be one gun or an entire collection. Our trained professionals are experienced, friendly and knowledgeable. We are a fully licensed and insured Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL).

WINTER 2012/2013 DELAWARE LAWYER 25 Farnan continued to attempt to broker His personal injury claim would have to another deal. be liquidated outside of the Bankruptcy A two-day trial was held in Decem- The Dodgers still Court in the California state court litiga- ber, 2011. Fox had two expert witness- tion commenced before the bankruptcy, es.23 After closing argument, the Judge had to select a high which was stayed by the filing.28 Nev- announced that he was going to issue a ertheless, the Dodgers attempted proce- written decision but then explained he bidder for the team, durally in the bankruptcy to disallow a was going to rule in the Dodgers’ favor. proof of claim filed on behalf of Stow The litigation quickly shifted to the and his children. Stow, who retained District Court after Fox filed an expe- obtain MLB approval a highly regarded firm specializing in dited appeal. Remember that the Dodg- bankruptcy, opposed this procedural ers and Blackstone, their investment and consummate move, and also argued that the Plan bankers, were working feverishly on the improperly granted releases of third sale of the team, aiming to complete the a sale through parties and questioned the adequacy process in a matter of weeks. of reserves for creditor claims. Matters Soon the complexion of this liti- a chapter 11 plan. with Stow in the bankruptcy did get gation would change. District Court resolved, and the confirmation hearing Judge Leonard Stark granted Fox’s mo- was scheduled on April 13, 2012. Again, tion for a stay pending appeal and estab- A group led by former NBA great Magic timing was important – McCourt’s lished an accelerated briefing schedule. Johnson (an LA fan favorite), seasoned deadline for payment of $130 million The Judge, who was relatively new to MLB executive Stan Kasten and hedge to his ex-wife was April 30. The team’s the bench, demonstrated he was more fund Guggenheim Partners would buy objective was to remain on schedule for than capable of keeping up with the the team for an astonishing $2.15 bil- confirmation.29 bankruptcy lawyers’ fast-paced ways by lion. The purchase price was record On the eve of the confirmation hear- issuing an oral decision and then keep- setting for a U.S. professional sports ing, there was still much to accomplish. ing his promise to issue a written opin- franchise.24 The price was a reflection of One very significant hurdle was obtain- ion a few days later. The Dodgers were how valuable media rights had become ing League approval of all aspects of going to be perilously near the end of in professional sports (the new owners the purchase of the team. Since MLB their marketing process while the ap- did not negotiate a new media rights had open issues as of the deadline for peal was pending. It was not surprising deal in connection with their acquisi- opposing the plan, it filed an objection. when days before appellate argument tion, but the contract with Fox expires On the morning of the hearing, MLB’s 25 the Dodgers announced a settlement after the 2013 season). legal team headed over to Young Con- with Fox. Now that the team had a buyer, away’s Delaware office for discussions Heading into the late innings of its court approval through confirmation of with the Dodgers and Guggenheim and 26 bankruptcy, the Dodgers still had to se- a chapter 11 plan was necessary. Con- the mediator, Judge Farnan. lect a high bidder for the team, obtain firmation is a two-step process. First, a Judge Gross moved the hearing to MLB approval and consummate a sale disclosure statement must be approved. 4 p.m. (on a Friday, which happened to through a chapter 11 plan. Under the A disclosure statement provides infor- be the 13th). Surely that would give the settlement with the League, a sale could mation necessary for a creditor or eq- parties enough time to resolve open include assets not owned by the Dodg- uity holder entitled to vote on a chapter issues? Not quite. By the time the hearing ers (including the parking lots), but did 11 plan to decide to accept or reject it. began at 6 p.m., there was not a festive not have to. In addition, the settlement Here, the proceeds from the sale of the atmosphere. MLB expressed various with Fox meant that bidders could dis- team would be so large that all credi- concerns to the Judge over details of cuss media rights (but the bankruptcy tors would be paid in full and equity in the sale. could not be used to reject the existing the debtor “LA Holdco LLC” – Frank Judge Gross, however, eventually telecast agreement). McCourt – would receive a substantial decided to confirm the plan that eve- 27 Interested bidders mentioned in the distribution. As such, the only party ning, paving the way for the $2+ bil- media included Steve Cohen of SAC, needing to vote on the Plan was Mc- lion sale to close. The League got its former Dodgers and Yankees manager Court himself. wish through McCourt’s sale of the Joe Torre, former Dodgers owner Pe- Under this scenario this process team, the transaction closed by April 30 ter O’Malley, former Dodgers players would seemingly proceed smoothly, but and the McCourts each received their Orel Hershiser and Steve Garvey, Dallas nothing was easy in this bankruptcy. millions.30 u Mavericks owner Mark Cuban and in- For instance, the creditor who had po- vestor Ron Burkle. tentially a very large claim – Brian Stow, The end notes accompanying this article are Eventually, in March 2012, the earth- the Giants fan severely injured on Open- posted on the Delaware Bar Foundation’s shattering winning bid was announced. ing Day – raised issues with the Plan. website, www.delawarebarfoundation.org.

26 DELAWARE LAWYER WINTER 2012/2013 At Bat In Bankruptcy Court Jeffrey M. Schlerf

FOOTNOTES of all places – the local Phillies summer baseball the Debtors related to its motion to dismiss the camp. We speculated when the Judge’s opinion Debtors’ chapter 11 cases. 1. A book was written about the Marvel would be released. The decision hit the docket 23. Fox hired a new law firm shortly before Entertainment case. D. Raviv, Comic Wars, while I was driving back to the office. 2002 (Broadway Books). trial, which resulted in its Delaware counsel 13. The Judge noted the team was “[f]ormerly taking a lead role at trial. 2. The top unsecured creditors listed on the the Brooklyn Dodgers, the team name is chapter 11 petition included various notable 24. The Miami Dolphins football team sold for derived from the fans who used to “dodge” that approximately $1 billion in 2009. MLB players: Manny Ramirez ($21 million), city’s trolleys.” Memorandum Order, at 1 n. 1 Andruw Jones ($11.1 million), Hiroki Kuroda (July 22, 2011). 25. On January 28, 2013 the Dodgers an- ($4.5 million), Rafael Furcal ($3.7 million) and nounced they had reached a 25 year deal with Ted Lilly ($3.4 million), plus the Chicago White 14. Id. at 4. Time Warner involving the team launching its Sox and famed broadcaster Vince Sculley. 15. Id. at 5. own network beginning in 2014. The deal was 3. Motion of Major League Baseball to 16. Id. at 7. The Court also advised that he estimated to be worth between $7 billion to Terminate Exclusivity or, in the Alternative, expected the League to propose a “short form $8 billion. Bill Shaikin, Dodgers, Time Warner to Compel the Debtors to Seek Assumption or credit agreement” which was “uncoupled” Cable announce new channel: SportsNet LA, Rejection of the Baseball Agreements, at para. from MLB’s oversight and governance of the LATimes.com (Jan. 28, 2013), http://www. 32. Dodgers. Soon thereafter the Dodgers and latimes.com/sports/dodgersnow/la-sp- MLB agreed to such a contract. dn-dodgers-time-warner-cable-sportsnet- 4. On May 24, 2011, Mr. Stow commenced la-20130128,0,1454054.story litigation in California state court against the 17. McCourt had been a commercial developer Dodgers and affiliates and certain unnamed in New England at the time he purchased 26. In a chapter 11 case, the sale of a debtor’s “Doe” defendants, asserting claims for the Dodgers in 2004. There was some media assets outside of the ordinary course of business negligence and seeking compensatory and speculation at that time that McCourt’s can occur pursuant to Section 363 of the punitive damages. motivation for buying the team included a Bankruptcy Code or under a chapter 11 plan. 11 U.S.C. § 363(b)(1). 11 U.S.C. § 1123(a)(5) 5. Michael Martinez & Stan Wilson, What Has desire to develop what was perceived as valuable land surrounding the stadium at Chavez Ravine (D) allows for a chapter 11 plan to include the Happened to the Dodgers?, CNN.COM (June 10, “sale of all or any part of the property of the 2011), http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/06/ in Los Angeles. The subject of McCourt’s intentions regarding these non-debtor assets estate, either subject to or free of any lien, or the 09/dodgers_fan.exodus/index_html; distribution of all or any part of the property Editorial, True to the Dodgers: The storied would surface again during the bankruptcy when the team was finally put up for sale. of the estate among those having an interest in franchise of Rickey and O’Malley must be such property of the estate. . .” In contrast to owned by someone other than Frank McCourt, 18. One obvious complication arose from the the Dodgers’ sale, the sale of the Texas Rangers L.A. Times (Jul. 2, 2011), http://latimes. fact that after the team was purchased, Jamie in their bankruptcy was originally attempted com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed- played a significant role in the operations of the through a § 363 sale. Ultimately, however, due dodgers-20110702,0,1265931.story); Larry team. to numerous objections raised by creditors, it Behrendt, Frank McCourt Must Go, IT’S 19. What is alleged to have happened is the was accomplished pursuant to a confirmed ABOUT THE MONEY.NET (June 21, firm drafting the agreement had created six plan. 2011), http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/ originals, three of which were what Frank had 27. It was estimated that McCourt would 2011/06/21/commissioner-selig-frank- intended (100% ownership) and three of which mccourt-must-go-a-petition. receive almost $1 billion from the sale, even reflected that the marital property included the after payment of taxes, legal fees and other 6. Motion of Major League Baseball to Dodgers. obligations, including $131 million paid Terminate Exclusivity, supra note 3, at para. 30. 20. Judge Farnan served as a United States towards his settlement with his ex-wife. 7. Id. at para 32. District Court Judge for 25 years, until 2010, 28. The Bankruptcy Code precludes the Bank- 8. Denial was for various reasons, including in the District of Delaware. He was Chief Judge ruptcy Court from conducting a trial on a that McCourt did not shop for better offers for from 1997 to 2001, during a time when due to personal injury claim without the claimant’s the team’s media rights, the advance payment the workload of Delaware Bankruptcy Judges consent. would sacrifice the Dodgers’ future, the deal (there were only two), the Delaware District Court Judges presided over bankruptcy cases. 29. The Dodgers had very experienced bank- would separate a valuable asset from the team ruptcy professionals representing them during and nearly half of the advance would be used After his retirement from the bench in 2010, Judge Farnan started his own law firm and, the case: Dewey LaBoef as lead counsel, for McCourt’s marital obligations, and the deal Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor as Delaware was only a short-term fix and would prevent in addition to practicing in the area of patent litigation (in which he had vast experience as a counsel and The Blackstone Group as invest- the Dodgers would re-valuing the asset for 17 ment bankers. These professionals were worthy years. trial judge), he has served as an arbitrator and mediator. adversaries. In addition to the challenge of 9. Motion of Major League Baseball to Term- getting the sale under the plan consummated inate Exclusivity, supra note 3, at para. 37. 21. There were rumors that reaching a settle- by April 30, the lawyers at Dewey LaBoef faced ment required at least one visit to Wilmington daily stories in the financial press about partner 10. Among other things, MLB would lend on by the Commissioner and McCourt. attrition at their firm and its financial instability. an unsecured basis (i.e., without taking any There was increasing speculation that the firm collateral). 22. In an interesting twist, previously Fox had not filed a formal objection to the Debtors’ itself would soon file for chapter 11. Dewey 11. Other parties to this proceeding included first media rights motion but rather a joinder LaBoef eventually did file for bankruptcy. the unsecured creditors’ committee (consisting to MLB’s objection. Additionally, Fox had 30. The bankruptcy may have come to an of Brian Stow; the Major League Baseball not served discovery earlier. The Dodgers end after the plan was confirmed, but the Players Association; KABC Radio; plus two took the position that Fox was not entitled McCourts’ divorce proceeding continued trade creditors), the Office of the United States to take any discovery in connection with the to make the headlines. In September, 2012, Trustee and Jamie McCourt. upcoming trial on the team’s amended motion Jamie McCourt filed a motion to set aside 12. In what can only be described as a “Delaware for approval of marketing procedures. Fox the couple’s divorce settlement, claiming that moment”, on the Friday afternoon when the disagreed, serving discovery on, among others, Frank McCourt fraudulently misrepresented opinion was issued, Bob Brady, Delaware MLB. On December, 22, 2011, Judge Gross the value of the Dodgers’ franchise. counsel to the Dodgers and I crossed paths at – ruled that Fox was entitled to discovery from