|
|
 Lived to tell about it and will never do it again
Posts: 5408
 
| Wasn't yesterday the 29th the day that the hearing was to be held? I haven't seen anything about the outcome yet, just wondering if anyone knows anything. |
|
| |
|
 Saint Stacey
 
| Doesn't appear to be a ruling on it yet. I'd assume that would be good for the PRCA. I did read where the ERA was claiming the PRCA was a monopoly. Pretty stupid move on their part if you ask me. I know the timed event qualifier for Denver was Monday and Tuesday for tie down and steer wrestling. I believe team roping was today? |
|
| |
|
Nut Case Expert
Posts: 9305
Location: Tulsa, Ok | It is pretty common for a decision to take some time after written and/or verbal arguments are presented. I don't think it necessarily bodes any better for one party or the other. |
|
| |
|
Lived to tell about it and will never do it again
Posts: 5408
| I'm pretty sure that I read earlier that the PRCA was allowing them to go ahead and enter at least until the end of the year while they were waiting on a ruling. It is going to be interesting for sure. |
|
| |
|
  Fact Checker
Posts: 16572
Location: Displaced Iowegian | SC Wrangler - 2015-12-30 6:58 PM It is pretty common for a decision to take some time after written and/or verbal arguments are presented. I don't think it necessarily bodes any better for one party or the other.
I agree......if anything a delay in a decision would be better for the ERA members. The injuction allows them to compete at the PRCA rodeos until the case is decided in court. |
|
| |
|
Saint Stacey
| euchee - 2015-12-30 6:29 PM
I'm pretty sure that I read earlier that the PRCA was allowing them to go ahead and enter at least until the end of the year while they were waiting on a ruling. It is going to be interesting for sure.
They couldn't compete if they were at the court testifying. That was my point about the Denver qualifier being at the same time as the court date. So some if them missed Denver no matter what the outcome was. At least the tie down ropers and doggers that were testifying. Not that one rodeo means that much.
I know Denver and Odessa were concerns since entries were a couple of weeks ago and they knew there wouldn't be an answer yet. |
|
| |
|
Lived to tell about it and will never do it again
Posts: 5408
| SKM - 2015-12-30 8:06 PM euchee - 2015-12-30 6:29 PM I'm pretty sure that I read earlier that the PRCA was allowing them to go ahead and enter at least until the end of the year while they were waiting on a ruling. It is going to be interesting for sure. They couldn't compete if they were at the court testifying. That was my point about the Denver qualifier being at the same time as the court date. So some if them missed Denver no matter what the outcome was. At least the tie down ropers and doggers that were testifying. Not that one rodeo means that much. I know Denver and Odessa were concerns since entries were a couple of weeks ago and they knew there wouldn't be an answer yet.
I never thought about that, you have a good point. |
|
| |
|
Mrs. Troy
Location: western Nebraska | SKM - 2015-12-30 8:06 PM
euchee - 2015-12-30 6:29 PM
I'm pretty sure that I read earlier that the PRCA was allowing them to go ahead and enter at least until the end of the year while they were waiting on a ruling. It is going to be interesting for sure.
They couldn't compete if they were at the court testifying. That was my point about the Denver qualifier being at the same time as the court date. So some if them missed Denver no matter what the outcome was. At least the tie down ropers and doggers that were testifying. Not that one rodeo means that much.
I know Denver and Odessa were concerns since entries were a couple of weeks ago and they knew there wouldn't be an answer yet.
I doubt if the guys that were in court got the hearing had to go to the qualifier. The top 35 I think are already entered if they wanted to be |
|
| |
|
10D Crack Champion
| This is probably a dumb question, but I'm going to ask it anyway. Let's say hypothetically the court sided with the PRCA. Would the ERA contestants get their PRCA membership fees refunded? I assume most who are wanting to compete in the early 2016 rodeos have already paid their membership fee for 2016.
Edited by sodapop 2015-12-30 9:04 PM
|
|
| |
|
Lived to tell about it and will never do it again
Posts: 5408
| sodapop - 2015-12-30 8:43 PM This is probably a dumb question, but I'm going to ask it anyway. Let's say hypothetically the court sided with the PRCA. Would the ERA contestants get their PRCA membership fees refunded? I assume they had to already pay their membership fee for 2016.
Good question |
|
| |
|
Saint Stacey
| doglady - 2015-12-30 7:26 PM
SKM - 2015-12-30 8:06 PM
euchee - 2015-12-30 6:29 PM
I'm pretty sure that I read earlier that the PRCA was allowing them to go ahead and enter at least until the end of the year while they were waiting on a ruling. It is going to be interesting for sure.
They couldn't compete if they were at the court testifying. That was my point about the Denver qualifier being at the same time as the court date. So some if them missed Denver no matter what the outcome was. At least the tie down ropers and doggers that were testifying. Not that one rodeo means that much.
I know Denver and Odessa were concerns since entries were a couple of weeks ago and they knew there wouldn't be an answer yet.
I doubt if the guys that were in court got the hearing had to go to the qualifier. The top 35 I think are already entered if they wanted to be
Well you would know about the guys stuff better than me, lol! I know Luke and other top names were there so I just assumed everyone had to survive the qualifier to make it into the perfs. Although come to think of it...the numbers don't add up if they take 10 from the first day, 10 from the second and 20 from the two day average. That's only 40 and it would take more than that to fill the perfs even by running them twice. The barrels are so much simpler. |
|
| |
|
10D Crack Champion
| euchee - 2015-12-30 9:01 PM sodapop - 2015-12-30 8:43 PM This is probably a dumb question, but I'm going to ask it anyway. Let's say hypothetically the court sided with the PRCA. Would the ERA contestants get their PRCA membership fees refunded? I assume they had to already pay their membership fee for 2016. Good question
Edited by sodapop 2015-12-30 9:17 PM
|
|
| |
|
Expert
Posts: 2121
Location: The Great Northwest | There may not be a membership fee. Are they invited from certain qualifications? |
|
| |
|
Porta Potty Pants
Posts: 2600
| I thought I read somewhere that the judge asked them to try to resolve their dispute with a mediator. I could be wrong. |
|
| |
|
10D Crack Champion
| skye - 2015-12-30 9:11 PM
There may not be a membership fee. Are they invited from certain qualifications?
In the PRCA?
They have to renew their membership each year like every other association......or so I thought. |
|
| |
|
Saint Stacey
| skye - 2015-12-30 8:11 PM
There may not be a membership fee. Are they invited from certain qualifications?
In the ERA...they haven't been real forthcoming with the details. I read somewhere all members were shareholders that paid in. Rumor was $10,000. But that amount has not been confirmed that I'm aware of so it could very well be a number that was just bad info. |
|
| |
|
10D Crack Champion
| No court info update, but just an interesting read. http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/other-sports/article52002870.html
Edited by sodapop 2015-12-30 9:37 PM
|
|
| |
|
 Mature beyond Years
Posts: 10780
Location: North of the 49th Parallel | I heard there was a gag order of what happened in the court today so who knows what went down and the outcome. |
|
| |
|
 Elite Veteran
Posts: 1037
| azsun - 2015-12-30 9:11 PM
I thought I read somewhere that the judge asked them to try to resolve their dispute with a mediator. I could be wrong.
Yep I read that too. Cinderella horses posted that on FB early yesterday afternoon. |
|
| |
|
 Toastest with the Mostest
Posts: 5712
Location: That part of Texas | kboltwkreations - 2015-12-31 7:36 AM azsun - 2015-12-30 9:11 PM I thought I read somewhere that the judge asked them to try to resolve their dispute with a mediator. I could be wrong. Yep I read that too. Cinderella horses posted that on FB early yesterday afternoon.
Mediation would go for this case and every case that is contested -- in other words, standard procedure for any case in the United States in any court. Most judges won't set a case for a final contested hearing until the parties try to mediate it and reach an agreement without having to take up valuable court time if at all possible.
I suspect the court will delay handing down a ruling for a week or so. If the original filing documents are any indication, I'm sure each party along with other parties have submitted 100's of pages worth of documents arguing case law and statutues that the judge will want to consider before making a final decision. On smaller cases I've worked on, it's not uncommon for it to take 1-2 weeks before a judge makes a final decision so I'm not surprised that the judge said nothing yesterday. |
|
| |
|
Porta Potty Pants
Posts: 2600
| Red Raider - 2015-12-31 9:39 AM
kboltwkreations - 2015-12-31 7:36 AM azsun - 2015-12-30 9:11 PM I thought I read somewhere that the judge asked them to try to resolve their dispute with a mediator. I could be wrong. Yep I read that too. Cinderella horses posted that on FB early yesterday afternoon.
I suspect the court will delay handing down a ruling for a week or so. If the original filing documents are any indication, I'm sure each party along with other parties have submitted 100's of pages worth of documents arguing case law and statutues that the judge will want to consider before making a final decision. On smaller cases I've worked on, it's not uncommon for it to take 1-2 weeks before a judge makes a final decision so I'm not surprised that the judge said nothing yesterday.
I'm sure their attorneys knew this ... you would think they would have tried to work on this before being ordered to do so. |
|
| |
|
 Expert
Posts: 3815
Location: The best kept secret in TX | I find the Star Telegram article author to be very bal$$y toward the PRCA .... LOL |
|
| |
|
Toastest with the Mostest
Posts: 5712
Location: That part of Texas | azsun - 2015-12-31 9:53 AM Red Raider - 2015-12-31 9:39 AM kboltwkreations - 2015-12-31 7:36 AM azsun - 2015-12-30 9:11 PM I thought I read somewhere that the judge asked them to try to resolve their dispute with a mediator. I could be wrong. Yep I read that too. Cinderella horses posted that on FB early yesterday afternoon.
I suspect the court will delay handing down a ruling for a week or so. If the original filing documents are any indication, I'm sure each party along with other parties have submitted 100's of pages worth of documents arguing case law and statutues that the judge will want to consider before making a final decision. On smaller cases I've worked on, it's not uncommon for it to take 1-2 weeks before a judge makes a final decision so I'm not surprised that the judge said nothing yesterday. I'm sure their attorneys knew this ... you would think they would have tried to work on this before being ordered to do so.
Most courts have a standing order -- either actually written out as part of the local court rules -- or informally known that mediation is a requirement on any contested case. It's sometimes hard to get a mediator picked without a court order setting down the time period for this to take place and if there is an argument on who is picked as a mediator, the court will order a certain one to be used. It's not a big deal that they were ordered to do this or that the court made an order for it to be done (if one does exist). I'm sure the attorneys probably consulted over who to use and had the court possibly sign an order saying that they will use John Doe and have mediation conducted by month,date,year to have something on record and to help set deadlines. |
|
| |
|
 Own It and Move On
Location: The edge of no where | My $$$$ says they'll come to some agreements and we will still see Trevor, Bobby and Ryan kicking butt in Vegas next year. |
|
| |
|
Saint Stacey
| Just read where the judge sent it to a 30 day mediate. The cowboys can enter PRCA rodeos. Any money they win will go into a separate account where it will stay until this is figured out. If the ERA wins, they will get the money. If the PRCA wins, the money those in the lawsuit won will go back into the purses and paid out accordingly. |
|
| |
|
Curve Ball
Posts: 2256
Location: Pelham, TN | Bumping this so we can keep up with the results!!! |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 112
| Just out of curiosity, why can someone in the PRCA not file the same right to work deal against the ERA? They have made it very limited to those who can compete in their association have they not? |
|
| |
|
Fact Checker
Posts: 16572
Location: Displaced Iowegian | miss_n_cinch13 - 2016-01-04 5:57 AM Just out of curiosity, why can someone in the PRCA not file the same right to work deal against the ERA? They have made it very limited to those who can compete in their association have they not?
Making it hard does not limit nor constitute a case of "right to work".....they are having "qualifiers", therefore, anyone can compete to "qualify". |
|
| |
|
I just read the headlines
Posts: 4483
| But didn't ERA say their contestants couldn't compete in the PRCA's Champions Tour? I know nothing about law, is that comparable to the ERA saying the Prca is limiting their right to work? I admittedly have only been following this loosely so I may be totally off base. |
|
| |
|
Veteran
Posts: 112
| NJJ - 2016-01-04 9:01 AM
miss_n_cinch13 - 2016-01-04 5:57 AM Just out of curiosity, why can someone in the PRCA not file the same right to work deal against the ERA? They have made it very limited to those who can compete in their association have they not?
Making it hard does not limit nor constitute a case of "right to work".....they are having "qualifiers", therefore, anyone can compete to "qualify".
Okay that makes sense. I am not a fan of the ERA at all, it seems like if the ERA wins this case then it will be difficult to bump the hand chosen competitors out at the finals. They are ones at the top of the PRCA standings year in and year out. How would any 'outsiders' qualify if the ERA owners can still compete at the PRCA rodeos? |
|
| |
|
Saint Stacey
| GLP - 2016-01-04 9:49 AM
But didn't ERA say their contestants couldn't compete in the PRCA's Champions Tour? I know nothing about law, is that comparable to the ERA saying the Prca is limiting their right to work? I admittedly have only been following this loosely so I may be totally off base.
The ERA is owned by the stockholders aka the contestants. It isn't so much the were told they couldn't do the PRCA Challenge rodeos as it was they just came out and said they will not do the Challenge and will focus on the ERA instead of those particular Challenge rodeos. |
|
| |
|
I just read the headlines
Posts: 4483
| SKM - 2016-01-04 5:48 PM
GLP - 2016-01-04 9:49 AM
But didn't ERA say their contestants couldn't compete in the PRCA's Champions Tour? I know nothing about law, is that comparable to the ERA saying the Prca is limiting their right to work? I admittedly have only been following this loosely so I may be totally off base.
The ERA is owned by the stockholders aka the contestants. It isn't so much the were told they couldn't do the PRCA Challenge rodeos as it was they just came out and said they will not do the Challenge and will focus on the ERA instead of those particular Challenge rodeos.
Oh, ok thanks for clarifying.  |
|
| |
|
Nut Case Expert
Posts: 9305
Location: Tulsa, Ok | Sadly the PRCA's new bylaw does not effect just the ERA shareholders. They are forcing PRCA cardholders who may happen to be directors of some small regional rodeo associations to either resign from those positions or forfeit their PRCA cards. |
|
| |
|
 Am I really the Weirdo?
Posts: 11181
Location: Kansas | SC Wrangler - 2016-01-04 7:10 PM Sadly the PRCA's new bylaw does not effect just the ERA shareholders. They are forcing PRCA cardholders who may happen to be directors of some small regional rodeo associations to either resign from those positions or forfeit their PRCA cards.
Exactly. Some associations are having trouble recruiting new directors to replace outgoing ones because of the PRCA's new rules. |
|
| |
ERA----PRCA