About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

2 You Make the Call 1 (1999-2000)

handle is hein.blasports/ansrvds0002 and id is 1 raw text is: Volume 2, Number 1 { Summer 19991 Minnesota Twins Partnership v. State of Minnesota, 592 N.W.2d 847 (MN, April 29, 1999) MINNESOTA TWINS EXEMPT FROM ANTITRUST INVESTIGATION In October 1997, Carl R. Pohlad, on behalf of the Minnesota Twins Partnership, announced that he had signed a letter of intent to sell the Twins to North Carolina businessman Donald C. Beaver. The sale was contingent upon the Minnesota State Legislature's refusal to authorize pubic funding for a new stadium by November 30, 1997. Former Governor Arne H. Carlson and key legislators traveled to Milwaukee to confer with then-Acting Commissioner of Major League Baseball (MLB) Allan Bud Selig. Selig informed Governor Carlson that if a publicly funded stadium was not authorized and built, MLB team owners would approve the Twins' move. The Minnesota Legislature subsequently rejected all stadium bills introduced in the special legislative session called by Governor Carlson. On December 17, 1997, the Minnesota Attorney General served the Twins with civil investigative demands (CIDs) as part of an investigation into possible violations of state antitrust laws. The CIDs served on the Twins requested documents concerning the financial viability of the Twins' current stadium (Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome), the methods used by other professional baseball teams to obtain stadia, the potential purchase of the Twins by Beaver, and the 1961 relocation of the Washington Senators to Minnesota. In addition, the CIDs included interrogatories seeking information on the Twins' effort to produce a new stadium, as well as information on the structure, governance, and revenues of MLB. The Twins then filed a motion for a protective order. The Twins argued that they were exempt from Minnesota's antitrust laws because the U.S. Supreme Court previously held that the business of professional baseball is exempt from compliance with federal antitrust laws. However, the Ramsey County District Court rejected this argument and ordered the Twins to comply with the CIDs. The Minnesota Court of Appeals denied the Twins' request for review, holding that the issues presented were premature. The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the district court order, stating the Twins' were under no obligation to comply with the CIDs because the business of professional baseball is exempt from @ Copyright 1999, National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School Page 1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most