Speaker 1: All ras.
Speaker 2: Each time to check in with Preston and Garrett Handy
of Handy and Handy for sports court. Handy and Handy
are your accident and personal injury attorneys ready to assist
with any related.
Speaker 1: Questions you may have.
Speaker 2: Visit them online at Handylawutah dot com. Big Firm Experience,
Small Firm Attention.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to sports. Here on your one O three
nine nine eight point three ESPN the fan dial.
Speaker 3: He's stop for a little sports court. That's right, Big
Firm Experience, fall from attention. It's stop to play a
little judge and jury. What's the version on the biggest
headlines in sports?
Speaker 4: A lot?
Speaker 3: It' stop for a little sports court. Brought to you
by our good friends at Handy and Handy. Big Firm Experience,
Ball Firm Attention. Each week, we're breaking down the real
life legal drama intersected with your favorite athletes, teams and leads,
contract disputes and alka sideline scandals, courtroom battles. We're diving
deep with Utah's most trusted injury attorneys. We got Garrett
and Pressed and Handy on the light. Gentlemen, how you
guys doing today?
Speaker 1: Hey Ben, how you doing good to be on Live
the Dream.
Speaker 3: Guys, appreciate you hopping on the dream. Hey, no room
for improvement. Knock on wood, here we go and can't
wait to get into a little sports court with you
gentlemen today.
Speaker 1: Let's start it off with this one little Supreme Court
ruling here.
Speaker 3: Here's are rather arguments hearing arguments in blockbuster cases challenging
transgender sports brand sports bands.
Speaker 1: What's the latest on this one?
Speaker 4: Well, it is the latest because it's been a hotbed
issue for a while. We've talked about many of these
instances where what happens is a transgender female who's a
biological male is playing on female sports team or competing
in female competition. And you know, there was the instance
with the swimmer and Riley Gains, the Kentucky swimmer, the
woman who you know couldn't win, and so she's been
a real activist in this. And what happened when all
these things were being seen that there was transgender females
playing in whether it was high school or college or whatever,
in female on female teams, states began to pass laws
and the majority of these laws were really basically saying, hey,
biological male who is a transgender female. No problem with that,
they're saying, but you can't participate on female teams and
compete against other females. So what happened when laws like
this were passed. Activist groups and even individual plaintiffs they
come forward and they challenge these laws, and they challenge
them based on what are constitutional issues? Really, not just
oh we don't like these issues. We're saying these violate
constitutional rights. Well, two states that made it through the
appeal system. They made it through the state system, they
made it through what's called the Federal Court of the
appeal system, and the United States Supreme Court SCOTIS decided
to hear these cases. And SCOTIS doesn't usually hear cases
unless they think it's an important issue to hear. It's
an issue of first impression and it needs to be
decided to set a precedent and to give guidelines going
forward with other laws. Well, the state of Idaho, in
the state of West Virginia's cases came up which were challenged.
So people challenging these losses and they're unconstitutional. Well, the
basic arguments are by the people challenging it are that, hey,
this violates Title fourteen Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution
where it involves gender rights, and whenever it involves gender,
things need to be highly scrutinized, and you can't be
treating you know, you can't be discrimination. That's really what
it comes down discrimination. Well, the other side, the ones
supporting the laws and these things, they're saying, hey, there's
really no constitutional right that addresses biological males transgender females
to play on women's teams. That's really the issue, and
you know, it's an emotional issue, it really is. So
arguments were heard, and most of the legal analysis coming
out think that it's it's going to uphold these laws,
essentially saying yeah, these laws are okay, and transgender females
cannot play on female teams. It's unfair, it's unfair competition,
that type of thing. But the question now that looks
at is if it comes down that way, if it does,
how far reaching is that? How broad is that opinion?
Because I read where only twenty seven states have passed
these laws, and twenty three actually have not paid these
laws and don't have them on the books. So the
question is, will this just go to these plaintiffs here
and say, yeah, your banned these laws? Are okay or
is it going to send a message to the other states.
I think it does. It sends a message to these
other states with laws, and it probably sends a message
to states that haven't passed laws. If you passed laws,
they'll probably be upheld. So, you know, one person argues said, hey,
we need this to be a national law. We can't
have it that. You know, transgender females can participate in
one state and they can't in another, you know, where
there's a lot of traveling teams and their college teams
are traveling all the time, and so how does that
affect it. So it'll be interesting to see how broad
how broad of a brush there is and how broadly
it applied. But regardless when the decision come down, I'm
not saying there has been a decision, it'll send a
message to everyone kind of with the leaning of the court,
and the court is a conservative court, so large part
they probably will uphold these laws.
Speaker 3: Still, it's perfectly fine for a transgender female though, to
play on a men's team, right if they make the team.
Speaker 4: Well, that's what a lot of people say, they're a
biological I mean, this gets into a lot of issues
that I don't fully understand. And I'm mindful and respectful
and sensitive to individuals that go through this, and they,
you know, and I think most people are saying, yeah,
if you claim to be transgender, and you claim to
be a transgender female, that's okay, and everybody needs to
respect each other. There's rights and boundaries and everything. But
then when it goes into well are we gonna let
you participate in female sports and female competitions against you know,
female athletes. And the one big one was this, uh,
this pennsylvani University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania swimmer, six foot four
dude who was just an okay swimmer on the men's team,
and he says these transitions, gets on the female teams,
and he wins the national championship, and a lot of females,
you know, were like, hey, we fought for this our
whole lives and now we're we're not allowed to win.
So that's where it's really looking like an unfair advantage.
But to your question, sure they can, if they can
make the.
Speaker 1: Team, That's what I'm saying.
Speaker 4: I don't think there's beenny, I don't think there'd be
any challenges to that.
Speaker 3: Sure, Well, yeah, exactly like, it's like you can still
play sports. It's not like your band from participation of sport.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's a it's a uh. It's a complicated issue
with strong feelings on both sides.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 4: I mean, I know there were a couple of transgender
females in Utah and it was just a couple, but
you know, I mean, their parents argue that this is
their chance to play sports and have competition and do
all that, and it goes to their mental health and
mental well being. And then you ask the question, well,
could they have made the men's soccer team or the
men's basketball team or you know, but that's not who
they wanted to be. That's their argument.
Speaker 3: Let's move on to NCAA basketball players and gamblers being
charged for allegedly rigging games.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of hullablue.
Speaker 3: Like one of the fastest growing markets right now is
just being able to bet on just about anything. And
obviously college athletics is being extremely impacted by gambling. And
these young men and young ladies that are getting into gambling.
Speaker 1: It's not a good thing. It's not a good thing
at all. What's the latest in this particular scenario.
Speaker 5: Yeah, this is another big case, another big indictment. I
guess I should say that that's come down. And you know,
we've talked recently. There was the NBA case with Terry Rozier, right,
similar type of case. There was the Chauncey Phillips, you know,
poker ring case. So there's been a lot of these
sports betting cases that we've talked about. This one. Maybe
what's a little different about it is it involves college
basketball players, and it really involves I mean a whole
bunch of schools involved in this. I think there's gosh,
there are forty schools I think implicated in this. Most
of them are all mid major schools, and none of
our local schools I don't see on this list. I mean,
but just as an example, Ben, I mean schools like Abilene, Christian,
Alabama State, Buffalo, Choppin State, Eastern Michigan, Fordham Kennesas State.
I mean, you get the idea, right, and so a
lot of times what was happening is you had some
people on the outside who would contact these players, usually
on underdog teams, and a lot of times this involved
just the point spread, and so you know, they get
these players on the underdog team to shave some points, right,
not score, you know, keep their point totals down so
that whether going into halftime or by the end of
the game, they'd win their bets. And I mean so,
I mean there was a like a four hundred thousand
dollars bet placed on a game between Kennesas State and
like Buffalo, right, I mean, it's crazy who's betting on this?
Speaker 2: You know?
Speaker 5: Or there was another one for Butler to cover a
six point five spread against DePaul. Well, what's coming out now?
I mean talking about DePaul in particular. I mean, and
this just goes back two seasons. This is all very
current stuff, right, I mean DePaul went oh to sixteen
in Big East play two years ago. Four of their
players from that team are implicated in this. Some of
these guys are on current rosters. And as of as
this news coming down, this is just today that this
in these charges came out. They've been cut from their
teams a few of them already. So anyway, it's it's again,
like you said, kind of just more of the same.
We've we've seen some of this, but here we are.
This is impacting some lower levels of college basketball.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's got to be. I mean, I hate
to legalize certain things.
Speaker 3: Right, There'll always be kind of a market for this stuff,
but it's I think the NCAA president has like asked
the federal government to like to help him, and I
can't remember what was what the specific request was, but
limit the ability of college sports gambling because it's infiltrating
the competitive the competitive.
Speaker 1: Nature of sport, especially at the collegiate levels. So this
isn't issue. This is a big issue.
Speaker 3: And more and more young people are are gambling that
literally their their funds away and going into debt just
to gamble.
Speaker 5: Yeah, no, exactly, And that's what they're asking for. And
one of the one in particular what they're asking for
is a ban on these prop bets, right, so you know,
I mean, if we're just going to bet that Richie
Saunders is going to be two points under his average, right,
I mean you can bet on anything right in these
in these games, you know how many minutes played or whatever.
And so they've just made it so easy with online betting,
and and uh, it's yeah, it's all over the place,
but we've got to have some new rules in place.
Speaker 1: All right, let's move on.
Speaker 3: RAMS owner and Inglewood legal battle over placement of billboards.
Speaker 1: A little marketing and advertising lawsuit. What are we at?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 4: Exciting stuff for everything. Yeah, this is crazy exciting stuff.
So the owner of the Los Angeles Lunchiz Los Angeles Rams,
uh multi molti billionaire. H mister, how do you say
his name?
Speaker 5: Uh?
Speaker 4: Cronky, crunky, crunky. He is uh the owner of the Rams,
but apparently part owner of that. He fas a lawsuit
against the city of Inglewood where he's claiming they've entered
into an agreement with Wild Media stop his sixty billboards
around Hollywood Park where Sofi Stadium is. He's claiming that
this violet skill when this thing was going on, that
he put this up, probably saying, hey, you know, we
can't have stuff like that around here. This is kind
of our place to market and that type of thing
and earned revenue and he and he, uh, this advertisement
would undergot the exclusive sponsorships table ambush of marketing around
some of the world's sporting events. It's not just the
rams of there's not the charges to play there. There's
a ton of going around. You start putting up sixty boards,
it's going to make place look like, you know, like Vega.
The city response there there says, hey, wait a minute,
this is you're being greedy, mister. We have a right
we want with personal public property as long as we
go through their proper processes to go through that. And
you know, and this is revenue for the city. And
so I guess what it comes down to. Was there
an agreement and what part of that agreement go and
does it violate that agreement? So fighting stuff. We'll see
if thingle would gets to put up any billboards.
Speaker 3: Yeah, man, your your connection is a little bit uh,
you know, disrupted. But so I don't know if you
want to move to the other spot where.
Speaker 1: You're at before. But oh sorry, you're okay. I can
hear you now. But yeah, you're okay disrupted there.
Speaker 4: But fans out there, what I said was really not
too exciting you. You didn't miss a lot about a
multi multi billionaire so in a city over billboards?
Speaker 3: All right, let's talk aeron judge, then all rise legal
when in a trademark lesson case.
Speaker 1: What do we got?
Speaker 5: Yeah, and you know how baseball teams or any team
does this right when a player's got a certain name
and they find some angle right, and they might do
this in the stadium on banners or on you know,
digital displays. And so this started happening in Yankee Stadium
with Aaron Judges. He was becoming popular. This goes back
to about twenty seventeen. And so one was all rise
right when Aaron Judge is up, or the other one
was here comes the Judge and so playing on this
legal theme with his name Judge. So at about that time,
Yankees are using these phrases. There's a guy in Long
Island who runs to the trademark office to register those
two phrases. He's going to put them on hats and
you know, T shirts and whatever and so some merch
and so this got into a dispute with the Yankees
over this trademark and the Yankees and Aaron Judge. I
guess Aaron Judge had not filed his own trademark for this,
and so part of the argument was, we'll wait a minute.
This is obviously about me, Aaron Judge, and this is
going to be really confusing for consumers. They're thinking, you
know that this is not a this is official merchandise.
He's not, and Aaron Judge isn't earning anything from that.
So they fought for what's called the common law trademark,
and they did. They did win their case in spite
of the guy who was going to make the T
shirts claiming that, well, you know, I had no I
just I like these phrases all rise and here comes
a judge. I don't know anything about Aaron Judge. I've
never heard of him. I've never been to a Yankees
baseball game. I've never seen him play. I don't know
anything about it. I just I just happen to like
these phrases. This has nothing to do with Aaron Judge.
And the court was not buying that. So I guess
the word is, if you've got a phrase you want
to use, better trademarket, better trademark lavoida legal fight.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, How do you check trademarks? Can we google that?
Speaker 5: Like?
Speaker 1: You know, is there a trademark website to see if
something's trademarked?
Speaker 5: Yeah, there is the US Patent and Trademark Office, and
so a lot of times. You know, if you've got
a one one thing that you know intellectual property lawyers do, right,
is they'll monitor these kinds of things for their clients, right,
And see if anybody's filing anything or coming up so
that they're on top of it. But yeah, it's something
you just have to be vigilant about.
Speaker 3: Gotta be vigilant, gotta be proactive. Final thing here a
little update on the river Side abuse case. X coach
testifies to witnessing abuse.
Speaker 1: What do we have here?
Speaker 4: Yeah, well we quick quick on this. We talked about
this last week and follow This is a lawsuit that
grows out of the acclaim by a gentleman who played
for an all star team back in the seventies and
early eighties that was sponsored by Riverside Church. It was
kind of the first of its type, an all star
basketball team with really good players that traveled around the
country and even outside the country with sponsorships. Well, years
and years later, this mister Powell comes out with claims
that the coach, Ernest Lorch, who was a multi millionaire
lawyer in New York City, was sexually abusing him and
other players. Well, mister Lorch has since he has since
passed away and can you hear me? Yes, yeah, gotcha, Okay,
he since passed away. So a lawsuit goes against Riverside
Church and the issue is this he's soon in Riverside Church.
At Riverside Church is saying, well, wait a minute, mister
Lurch was the bad actor. This guy was the pedophile,
sex abuser. Not you know, we're not on this, but
he's saying, hey, he was under your supervision. He was
the coach of this team. He sat on your board
of trustees. You knew or should have known that this
stuff was going on, and you could have prevented it. Well,
so now the thing starts to trial this week, and
whenever a trial starts, the plaintiff, the person bringing the lawsuit,
mister Powell, he has the burden of proving everything. He
has to prove the legal arguments. He has to prove
his claims that Riverside knew or should have known about
this going on. He has to prove his damages. He's
claiming PTSD and mental health and emotional damages from this
happening forty years ago. Well, one of the witnesses, bombshell
witness was an assistant coach of the team who said
he walked in on mister Kring Lurch and saw him
actually abusing sexually abusing a player, and he actually went
and reported it to the pastor of the church. Well,
here we come. Forty years later. They bring him into
trial and he testifies he actually took a bunch of
players and said he wasn't going to keep him there
because he didn't think they were safe. It's reported that
it was widely known around a lot of people that
this guy was a bad dude and there was some
inappropriate stuff going on. Well, the defense has attacked this
and saying, hey, this was forty plus years ago. How
can you remember all this. He's bringing this now, Why
is he bringing it now and didn't bring it earlier?
So we'll hear from all the plaintiff witnesses. The jury
gets to hear all of that, and then the defense
will put their case on and we'll see what happens.
But this is a type of This is a type
of testimony, and apparently there were a couple of other
players that testified. That really goes to the heart of
mister Powell's arguments about Hey, the church, he was under
their supervision, They knew and should have done something about it.
Speaker 1: Gentlemen, that is our sports court for today.
Speaker 3: The verdict is out and we appreciate you joining us
for yet another Sports Cord segment. You guys are better
at representing clients that have been injured, whether it's like
workman scomp or auto injury accident.
Speaker 1: Tell us what you do, how you do it, and
why our listener should give you call.
Speaker 4: Yeah, Ben, we love coming on here. It's a good
time to talk about these legal issues in the world
of sports. Handy and Handy is a personal injury law firm.
We've been around a long time. Garrett and I have
years and years of experience. We represent and help people
that have been involved in all kinds of accidents where
they it's not their fault and they've suffered injury, minor injury,
serious injury. They've they've incurred medical expenses, lost income, they
have real damages. We help them through the legal and
the insurance process, make sure they get compensated. And we
feel like we feel like our experience and the personal
attention we give to clients really sets us apart from
a lot of firms, and we hope you give us
a call. Call us at eight zero one two six
four six six seven to seven, or visit our website
at Handy Law Utah dot com.
Speaker 3: Get m a call, set up an appointment if you've
been injured, you need representation eight O one two six
four sixty six seven seven. That's TATA one two six
four sixty six seven seven handy Law Utah dot com.
Speaker 1: Gentlemen, thank you so much. Always a pleasure talking sports
court with you.
Speaker 4: Hey, thanks Ben be all.
Speaker 3: Right, thank you, gentlemen. We'll go to break. That was
a great segment with Garrett and Preston Handy.
Speaker 1: Appreciate them. Head on over to Handylawutah dot com and
get to know them a little bit better.
Speaker 3: If you've been in an accident and you need representation, Uh,
this is Cougar Sports. Ladies and gentlemen, we'll be back.
You're listening to your Utah ESPN Radio Network one of
three nine ninety eight point three