Comments on: Contract Law: Meet Rich Rodriguez

By: SportsAgentBlog.com - I Want to be a Sports Agent » Blog Archive » The RichRod Saga

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:45:00 +0000

[...] long ago I blogged on this matter when West Virginia University sued Rodriguez in state court seeking to recover on a $4 million buyout clause in Rodriguez’s contract, after the coach [...]

By: chris

chris — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 00:23:07 +0000

horrible hiring of bill stewart for wvu.

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:21:12 +0000

Fraudulent inducement is a tough case. He has to prove more than just that WVU didn’t do what they promised. He has to prove that at the time they offered him the contract, they had no intention of ever doing what they promised. That is, if WVU was just lazy and never got around to taking care of things, or if they studied the text book resale and changed their mind, then it may be a beach, but probably not fraud.

A breach of contract is when what is promised is not done, regardless (usually) of the reason. Fraud is a question of intent.

By: Johnny Cochran

Johnny Cochran — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 20:42:48 +0000

Ass Rod needs to just go away. Nobody likes him in WV anymore.

Like I said…

“If the contract dont fit…..

…..pay up bitches!”

By: Darren Heitner

Darren Heitner — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:40:53 +0000

West Virginians are saying, “Rich who?” Great win for Bill Stewart last night. Ends up being enough to make him WVU’s next head coach.

By: jason

jason — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:36:14 +0000

“Were these issues with promises not being followed through on brought to WVU’s attention during the term of the contract?”

According to Kendrick, Rodriguez was very vocal about things he allegedly felt either needed to be done by the university, and/or things which the university allegedly promised him they would do.

The university seems to be downplaying all this as very minor changes that they were in the process of working with Rodriguez on.

The “truth,” as they say, may be in the middle somewhere?

By: Matthew Allinson

Matthew Allinson — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:17:42 +0000

Maybe I wasn’t clear. I wasn’t saying that Rich Rod should assert Michigan picking up the tab as a defense. Rather, I was saying that this whole situation could have been avoided for him if he would have negotiated with Michigan in his new deal to pick up the costs/penalties associated with leaving WVU. If Michigan really wanted him to leave, they would have paid the costs and Rich Rod would not have to worry about refusing to pay the buyout costs and ending up in court as a result.

By: Matthew Allinson

Matthew Allinson — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:12:41 +0000

That’s true. Even with the exception, proving fraud carries an extremely high burden. I just don’t see it happening here. It seems like a big cop-out on his part. Were these issues with promises not being followed through on brought to WVU’s attention during the term of the contract?

By: Celtic Sports Management

Celtic Sports Management — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:59:06 +0000

Also, there is a parol evidence rule exception to show fraud.

By: Celtic Sports Management

Celtic Sports Management — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:57:00 +0000

He could also assert that the clause was an unreasonable non-competition covenant. However, since Rich Rod, and not the school that hires him, would be liable for the payment this does not have a high likelihood of success. It would be worth asserting as a defense however.