Talk:The Calhoun Shot: Difference between revisions
SportsGuy789 (talk | contribs) sort |
→technicality?: new section |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WP NBA|class=stub|importance=low}} |
{{WP NBA|class=stub|importance=low}} |
||
== technicality? == |
|||
I wouldn't call it a "technicality" that caused the insurance company to not pay up. They did absolutely nothing wrong. It was all on the Bulls for knowingly letting an ineligible contestant shoot anyway, figuring he would never make it. Not really a hard concept to understand...if you enter a contract with someone, like an insurance contract, and you violate the rules of the contract, that contract is not longer in effect. Once the bulls let him shoot without the OK of the insurance company, they no longer were insured and were legally agreeing to accept the responsibility. at the same time, they were legally voiding the clause in Calhoun's contract for the contest that would have made him ineligible. So legally they HAD to pay him. [[Special:Contributions/69.116.28.127|69.116.28.127]] ([[User talk:69.116.28.127|talk]]) 13:07, 21 July 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:07, 21 July 2023
National Basketball Association Stub‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
technicality?
I wouldn't call it a "technicality" that caused the insurance company to not pay up. They did absolutely nothing wrong. It was all on the Bulls for knowingly letting an ineligible contestant shoot anyway, figuring he would never make it. Not really a hard concept to understand...if you enter a contract with someone, like an insurance contract, and you violate the rules of the contract, that contract is not longer in effect. Once the bulls let him shoot without the OK of the insurance company, they no longer were insured and were legally agreeing to accept the responsibility. at the same time, they were legally voiding the clause in Calhoun's contract for the contest that would have made him ineligible. So legally they HAD to pay him. 69.116.28.127 (talk) 13:07, 21 July 2023 (UTC)