Asafa, Sherone Sue Supplement Manufacturer

[Sir X]

Asafa, Sherone Sue Supplement Manufacturer
Share on googleShare on twitterShare on facebook
Published:Friday | February 27, 2015Leighton Levy
Track and field magazine Athletics Weekly (AW) is reporting that Doyle Management is to sue Epiphany D1 for US$8 million ($J928 million) on behalf of Jamaican sprinters Asafa Powell and Sherone Simpson.

http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/s...t-manufacturer

[Gamma]

the management company cannot sue on behalf of the athletes, they can probably instruct attorneys but the suit has to be in the name of the athletes because the management company was not the ne who suffered the injury ... just a point of order

[Jangle]

That's why me pay yuh the big retainer

[Jangle]

Powell was meant to be one of the main high-profile competitors at the event, racing in the Men’s 60 metres.
The Jamaican sprinter’s expected appearance in Athlone had attracted some controversy with Powell only having returned to the track last summer.
He had been banned for testing positive for the drug oxilofrine in 2013, but had his 18-month suspension reduced to six months by the Court of Arbitration for Sport last year.
http://www.herald.ie/sport/other-spo...-31005265.html


The damages done to both Asafa's and Sherone's images are irreparable because these foreign reporters don't go the extra mile to inform their readers.

"The supplement was tested by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and they confirmed that the banned drug was in that particular product. Epiphany D1 has now been placed on the US Anti-Doping Agency’s High Risk Dietary Supplement List."

[Don1]

A couple things on this....

the management company cannot sue on behalf of the athletes, they can probably instruct attorneys but the suit has to be in the name of the athletes because the management company was not the ne who suffered the injury ... just a point of order

First.... considering the considerable pecuniary losses and reputational damage suffered by the athletes... suing for a mere $8M is ridiculous. At least 1 more digit is needed... AFTER the 8

Second...It is conceivable that the agency agreements between said athletes and their agent devolved the right to sue to said agent. Of course with the consent of said athletes. Said agent would in most circumstances be better positioned to sue...being a Babylon registered corporation and presumably having the right to handle monies due said athletes.

Said agent would also have suffered losses due to diminution in said athletes' past earnings and probably their future earning potential.. This renders said agent's involvement in said suit on behalf of said athletes even more solidly grounded

So I said

Don1 Esq, RBLLB
Rum Bar Lawyer

[Gamma]

the suit will HAVE to be in the name of the athletes .....the agency will in all likelihood instruct the attorneys and manage the process. but the claimants MUST be asafa and sherone.

the agents claim is secondary and surogated to that of the athletes because if asafa and sherone have no claim or lose their case so does he, whereas they could win their case and it is possible that the agents would not be entitled to anything because the bulk of the loss is reputational and that is personal to the athletes.

[Don1]

I'm not arguing against the point that the named claimants must be said athletes. We are in agreement that the injured parties must be the claimants in a suit

I'm merely claiming that the "right to sue" on behalf of said claimants can be executed by said agent by virtue of appropriate enabling provisions in said agency contract

[Gamma]

the "right to sue" is not transferable in these instances where the cause of action is personal unless is the personal estate of a deceased.

instances of right to sue being transferable would be where rights are assignable e.g. under contracts (banks are a big example as they can sell their debt and the cause of action would follow with it.) or where the injured party is a minor

if by "right to sue" you mean to instruct lawyers then you are using the wrong terminology.

[Don1]

the "right to sue" is not transferable in these instances where the cause of action is personal unless is the personal estate of a deceased.

instances of right to sue being transferable would be where rights are assignable e.g. under contracts (banks are a big example as they can sell their debt and the cause of action would follow with it.) or where the injured party is a minor

if by "right to sue" you mean to instruct lawyers then you are using the wrong terminology.

Are you saying an agent such as Doyle cannot be granted power of attorney over aspects of clients' business affairs?

If such an agent cannot...I'll yield to your superior position and consider myself suitably instructed wise counselor

[Gamma]

... i am saying that the agent can have the authority to instruct attorneys to file suit on his client's behalf no more.

of course he can contract to handle aspects of the client's business affairs, including to execute contracts etc under a POA and thereby bind the client.

in this instance, any firm instructed to file suit would be foolhardy not to engage with the athletes personally despite being able to take instructions from the agent.

[Jangle]

Are you saying an agent such as Doyle cannot be granted power of attorney over aspects of clients' business affairs?

If such an agent cannot...I'll yield to your superior position and consider myself suitably instructed wise counselor

As the Barristah's agent, me need fi collect some money fi dem lawnings weh him just dish out. Yuh think a ambulance chasers me hire.

[Don1]

As the Barristah's agent, me need fi collect some money fi dem lawnings weh him just dish out. Yuh think a ambulance chasers me hire.

LOL miseeit

[Don1]

... i am saying that the agent can have the authority to instruct attorneys to file suit on his client's behalf no more.

of course he can contract to handle aspects of the client's business affairs, including to execute contracts etc under a POA and thereby bind the client.

in this instance, any firm instructed to file suit would be foolhardy not to engage with the athletes personally despite being able to take instructions from the agent.

ok...so in essence there is a distinction in our positions...but no essential difference

The agent can engage & instruct attorneys on behalf of clients... with clients as the named claimants & ultimate beneficiaries of any judgment

As to why athletes would do this thru their agent...it's not rocket science.

If athletes won't or are incompetent at monitoring what they ingest (with their careers on the line)... they're probably no good at initiating & pursuing legal action in a foreign place.

Yuh know 'ow much training time dat tek up...not to mention money??

[Gamma]

prezackly dat....

[Jangle]

Fling some Latin pon him yes mek him know seh yuh go a good uptown school.