(Spam Scone) wrote in message . com...
(Don Mihokovich) wrote in message . com...
The lawsuit is a public document filed in the State Courts of
California, so none of my limited knowledge on the suit is
confidential. Although I have not had an opportunity to read the
suit, it is my general understanding that one of the many counts of
the complaint is that Peterson's USCF affiliate was allegedly denied
certain so-called contractual rights to receive mailing labels, have
TLA's listed, etc.... for a CEA Grand National Scholastic Chess
Championship, which turned out to be a financial failure, only able to
pay out a fraction of the advertised $60,000 in US Savings Bond
"scholarships" (based on 1000 players). This case shall be
interesting as discovery will necessarily open all of CEA's finances
to see what profits it had and what profits it reported on past
tournaments to compare to its alleged lost profits in this case.
KidDon

Well then, this should be a slam-dunk for USCF. The event violated
USCF rules. USCF was well-within its rights to not advertise it.

As for discovery, that should be fascinating, as you said. Peterson
has been asked on the newsgroup for the financials of CEA. Do you
think he provides them?

The business agreements between CalChess, CEA, and possible other
third parties might be interesting reading as well. Who else in
USCF-land has a hand in Peterson's cookie-jar?
__________________________
When it comes to litigtion, there are far fewer "slam dunks" than you
would think. I agree that the suit sounds weak on the surface, but
won't make further judgment until I read the actual complaint in a few
days.

don