On 25 Aug 2003 10:42:48 GMT, (LeModernCaveman)
wrote:

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.

That's the correct thing to do.

Of course, most suits could have been avoided by better dialog along the way.

Why argue in court for such an expense when one can do that at a meeting or in
front of an arbiter?

You obviously know nothing about the history of this situation.
Richard Peterson has been hostile to the USCF for a very long time.
There is no way that this matter could be settled at a meeting or
before an arbitrator.

I do agree however that there is a bare possibility that Peterson's
suit has some legal merit. For example, can a national sporting
organization require that in order to play in its events one must join
the organization? I assume that the answer is yes, but it is always
possible tha a court will rule otherwise.

Sam Sloan