Assignment help brings you legal aspects sports assignment help solution.This is two statutes based on which the fact situation was analyzed and these included the all questions and answers.
METROPOLITAN SPORTS FACILITIES COMMISSION v. MINNESOTA TWINS PARTNERSHIP, Minnesota Court of Appeals, January 22, 2002
- The Twins and Major League Baseball had petitioned at Minnesota Supreme Court for quick review. However, the Supreme Court refused the motion.Hence, it was the district court that gave the decisions to this case between Minnesota Twins and Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission.
- The actual citation for the highest court is 638 N.W.2d 214. This was heard at District Court.
- The chief judge Toussaint was the one who had affirmed the decision (Findlaw, n.d). The other judges who were associated with this case included Schumacher and Klaphake.
- The complaint was originally filed at the district court.
- There were five factors that were referenced regarding the use agreement and financing the stadium to take the decision. These are as follows (Findlaw, n.d).
- The harm that needs to be experienced by plaintiff
- The merits of the parties
- Analysis of aspects of the fact situation
- Administrative burdens
- Nature and background of the relationship shared by the parties
There were two statues based on which the fact situation was analyzed and these included the state and federal statutes.
Questions and answers
- What is the fee for the player’s association that an agent must pay in order to become certified and to renew each year?
- MLBPA: Initial Fee $1000 Annual Renewal $500 (MLBPA, n.d)
- NFLPA: Initial Fee $1200 – $1700 Annual Renewal $1200 (NFLPA, n.d)
- WNBAPA: Initial Fee $2500 Annual Renewal $15000 (WNBPA, 2008)
- Is there a player’s association (union) for the following?
- Professional bowlers? Yes, the organization is Pro bowling,
- Horse racing jockeys? No
- Boxers or ultimate fighting? Yes, the organization is International boxing association
- Go to the NCAA.org site on information about NCAA student-athletes use of agents to answer the following questions.
- Does the NCAA Bylaw 3.2 allow a student-athlete to work with an agent or an agent’s representative?
According to the NCAA Bylaw 3.2, a student – athlete is not liable to retain the agent or at least receive any possible benefits from that particular agent. There are multiple try out restrictions that the student – athlete should follow (CSTV, 2013).
- Should an NCAA student-athlete accept a benefit from an agent’s runner what happens to the student-athlete?
A student – athlete is not liable to consent transportation or any other forms of benefits from an athlete agent (ND, n.d). This applies to the student – athlete as well as the close ones. Suppose that he accepts the benefit from an agent’s runner, the educational institution becomes aware on the runner’s identity and would declare that he is not eligible for the intercollegiate competition (ND, n.d). The student – athlete is liable to repay the net value of impermissible benefits.
Abigail Taylor Pool Assignment
- The defendant associated with this case includes the management of the pool who has lacked to deploy essential safety measures in the pool thereby letting Abigail to experience pool drain.
- The Taylor’s are Abigail’s thoughtful, accountable and loving parents. They have numerous potential legal claims in order to allege a complaint against the defendant at this stage (Davis, 2008).
- a) The pool has no legal instruction on the age group of people who can make use of the pool.
- b) The pool is liable to list the safety instructions for the individuals to have a safe experience.
- c) While the club has sufficient amenities, it is liable to deploy surveillance feature to control the harms that take place within the environment.
- d) The owner of the pool / club is liable to develop the perfect infrastructure so that the members can have a good experience. Instead, this situation has highlighted that the owner disregards the essential safety elements of a pool and have finally let things in this situation.
- The pool drain manufacturer is also a defendant of this issue according to the Taylor’s. However, the manufacturers might express defense against the liability attachment. The defense is as follows:
It is the liability of the parents to permit the child into the pool before the entry after considering all the aspects. The other area where he would defend the owner of the pool is the lack of safety measures or indication to the manufacturer if there is an issue. The pool has to be periodically checked by the pool owner. In that case, the manufacturer would have offered sufficient measures to eliminate occurrence of these types of issues.
a) Construct safety drain covers – This management action is meant to secure the experience of the child or person irrespective of the age. In addition to it, these covers can remain as great security measure.
b) Offer sufficient infrastructure with the public pool drain covers and systems – The public pool drain cover works similar to the safety drain cover. However, incorporation of public pool drain cover with the system will enable better functioning of the system and the pool on the whole.
8. Eliminate the barriers to free standing of people above the ground pools – It is possible to conduct educational programs to direct people on the ways to react while at pool. However, it is not possible to expect them to remember it always. In that case, the free standing has to be accompanied with additional safety measures so that people can rely on it when they stand on the ground above the pools.
9. The Spa Safety Act was eventually launched after the tragic case of Abigail. This act became effective from March 20, 2008 (MDH, 2009). The Abigail Taylor Swimming Pool Safety Act was launched in order to list the essential amenities that a pool should offer, estimated cost, type of the pool and the period of safety analysis (MDH, 2009). These have been launched in an aim to avoid occurrence of similar acts in the near future.
10. From the legal perspective, the defendant has to obviously experience numerous issues and harms (Revisor of Statutes, n.d).
a) Firstly, there would be strict changes to the infrastructure that would incur a large sum as a result.
b) The charges for the loss upon discussion with the Taylor’s
c) Conduct periodic safety inspections
d) The need for license and inspections (Revisor of Statutes, n.d)
Undoubtedly, the golf club remains as a major reason behind the loss of a child. Therefore, the harms would proliferate for the owner of the club.
WNBPA (2008), Collective bargaining agreement. Retrieved Jan 19, 2014, from http://www.ipmall.info/hosted_resources/SportsEntLaw_Institute/2008WNBA_WNBPA_CBA.pdf
NFLPA, Agent certification. Retrieved Jan 19, 2014, from https://www.nflplayers.com/About-us/FAQs/Agent-Certification-FAQs/
MLBPA, Agent regulations. Retrieved Jan 19, 2014, from http://reg.mlbpaagent.org/Documents/AgentForms/Agent%20Regulations.pdf
Davis, G. (2008), Swimming pool victim Abigail Taylor dies. Retrieved Jan 19, 2014, from http://voices.yahoo.com/swimming-pool-victim-abigail-taylor-dies-1312009.html?cat=8
Revisor of statutes, Minnesota Session Laws. Retrieved Jan 19, 2014, from https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/laws/?id=328&doctype=chapter&year=2008&type=0