|
|
 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. |
|
| |
Folks on-line