Titans Sue Kiffin, USC

This is friggin ridiculous. I'm not sure what the Titans have to gain by filing a suit except for the satisfaction of screwing with SC.

"I have spoken with Coach Fisher and he now has an accurate understanding of the timeline of events.

Maybe not so much. Is it too early to give Kiff an extension?

haha, and the fun don't done for the trogans.

Lane Kiffin: The gift that keeps on givin' And to think he's just getting started....

WOW, Jeff has sunk to a new all-time low! He is making a professional a.. of himself. The problem is that the case is being heard in Tennessee. I would move for a change of venue to another state as my first pre-trial motion, followed by a motion to dismiss as it is standard practice to ask coaches of other teams to be part of a new staff. I’m sure Jeff has done the same thing as has the Tennessee Titans on many occasions over the years. This is absurd to say the least!

Do the Titans really need a RBs coach? They have Chris Johnson.
SMH.

wolf, you are red-hot with the sweeeeet scooops this month!!

this sounds like an open and shut case! Pola's contract required his team to okay talking to another team. wow! right in black and white!!

not to mention Kiff diss'ing a fellow trOJie! no wonder fellow Southern Cal alums Fish and Al Davis loathe Kiff!!

Haden, if he is as smart as he tells everyone he is, will settle this case quickly and quietly.

wolf, keep oooooooooon scoopin'!!!!

Well, don't worry a bit about Jeff Fisher retiring from the NFL and coaching the Trojans into his twilight years. Pola is a Trojan. Fisher of all people should understand that and why it's special. Ownership obviously doesn't get it.

Is there a link to the complaint? Are "tortuous" and "tortious" used interchangeably in Tennessee?

Maybe that's why you get the head coach's permission first -- to create a defense against tortious interference. But poaching happens all the time. Hard to believe this is the first time an offer/overture was made to a coach prior to the first formal contact with that coach's team/school.

If a team/school can successfully sue for interference, why ever bother with buyout clauses? Did Pola's contract not have one?

@Jon: I love how Trogans continue to resort to/whine about how "other people/schools/teams do it too!". ALWAYS the last and weakest defense of a feable, moribund cause.

You're right, it isn't the "first time" this has happened. But, guess what? Being the "first time" isn't a necessary condition for filing a lawsuit. Shocker! Lane Violation is just a few months into the job, and he's already winning me over. Here's to a VERY tortuous and tortious tenure!

I thought it was "trOJan family" forever, btw...

Poach on, Kiffikins! Sue on, Fisher! Welch on, Pola!

Isn't the contract between Pola and Tenn? How is USC liable by offering a job to Pola? What a bunch of little cry babies in Tenn.

Troxans, can you not see that your football program is just a den of sharks? Kiffen will interfere with all your contracts by the tiem this is over! Pat Haden is going to spend his time as A.D. like the guy at the end of the circus parade, doing his best to clean up Kiffen's poop messes! First its a lawsuit over this Polo guy, and I bet Raiders owner Jim Davis is probably going to get jealous and find a reason to sue Keffin and USC next.

USC should just sue Kiffen itself, for being such a big doosh!

SUC gets sued and the knee jerk reaction of the Trojan faithfaul is, "What! This is friggin' not right! We (never) do anything shady!"
When you poach a coach one week before NFL training camp opens -- without even a courtesy call to the organization saying, 'Like it or not, we are hiring Pola,' Kiffin basically gave Fisher and the Titans the bird with turd attached. It was a big F-U to that wntire organization -- under the worst possible timing. Usually, in the sports world, interference claims are avoided by being "NORMAL" and contacting the other organization in ADVANCE and working out some sort of concession or buy-out! Not LAME KITTEN! He just f---s one person after another and SUC now has to pay the price. BTW, did Haden give his blessing to this hire? Or is this the final F-U by Garrett before he is run out of town on AUG 3?
LMAO! SUC (sic) in sel malum est.

For trogans who know how to read, a summary:

The statutory and common law causes of action have the following elements: (1) legal contract; (2) actor's knowledge of the existence of the contract; (3) actor's intention to induce the breach; (4) the wrongdoer acted maliciously; (5) breach of contract; (6) the wrongful act is the proximate cause of the breach of contract; and (7) damages.

Most relevant to this case is the malice issue. "Malice" means the willful violation of a known right, but does not require actual ill will or spite toward the injured party. Ordinarily, the commission of a harmful act without justifiable cause, privilege, or justification, equates to "legal malice".

Put another way, Lane effed up and SC's gonna lose.

It is possible that the terms of Pola's contract (which does not yet seem to be floating around online) may offer USC a defense, if the contract was terminable at will by Pola. In California, interference with an at-will contract requires a showing that the act of interference was independently wrongful in and of itself (in other words, that the interfering act was itself illegal under some other law or regulation) -- which it probably was not, in this case.

Of course, the laws of Tennessee may well differ on that point.

Whether or not the action is successful, the fact of the matter remains that in the sports world, when you want to hire someone under contract -- whether a player or coach -- common sense and PROFESSIONAL COURTESY (of which Lame lacks any) dictates that you call the other organization, explain your intentions, and work out a concession. The, you avoid the interference claims. If the other organizations says, 'No!' then you have to make a risk-benefit decision -- Do we proceed and risk suit? Or do we not proceed and avoid suit. In this case, Lame decided to risk suit WITHOUT EVEN TRYING TO GET A RELEASE OR CONCESSION FROM THE TITANS! What a SCumbag! He fits in quite well at FigTech.

It's clear that Kiffin failed to follow protocol. Question is whether the Titans have a real case or if it's just posturing. "Malice" is a high standard to meet.

Btw, the FigTech nickname doesn't make much sense. Most of the buildings occupied by the highly-regarded engineering school are closer to Vermont.

UB, you never did answer those question from before - did any of your boys apply to UCLA? Did any get in?

Very few personal services contracts are terminable at will, Cafe 84. In addition, I would suspect TN law will apply and not CA law. That would probably be driven by the contract terms. And, it remains to be seen under TN law if the Titans are entitled to specific perfromance. If so, they may be able to enjoin the SUC hire. All of these are unknown legal variables. We have not seen the complaint or the contract, nor do we know all the salient facts. What we do know, if the reportage is correct, is that LAME and SUC did not bother to call the Titans in advance. That is low-life conduct at its best.

UB,

I too would be surprised if Pola's contract is terminable at will, but I have no idea what the norm is in the world of NFL coaching.

And I certainly don't expect CA law to apply; I'm just discussing a possible defense that could hypothetically apply, depending on the facts and the law in TN (also, even if the contract says that it is to be governed/interpreted by the laws of a particular state, the interference tort claim against Kiffin/USC would not necessarily be controlled by that clause, it seems to me, whereas the breach claim against Pola himself would be).

Anyway, my main purpose was to point out that contractual interference law is not always as cut-and-dried as spedjones' "elements" post would suggest.

Re: enjoining Pola from working for USC, from what I've read on the internet today, the Titans' complaint seeks only unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, not injunctive relief, but it's also possible that the reporters don't understand the pleading language.

As for "low-life conduct at its best," so far I'm enjoying the soap opera that Kiffin has brought to USC. A UCLA fan I know complained of Dorrell a few years ago, "I'm just not being entertained." Well, I am being entertained!

Specific performance on an employment contract sounds dodgy; an injunction on the other hand... (Perhaps you meant so write "equitable relief" instead of "specific performance"?)

I see at-will employment contracts all the time. But the big boys get comped if the termination is without cause.

Lane Violation is at it again! This guy is a real keeper Trogans...Thanks Pete!

Bucket,
You have scored the biggest scoop today my man! I never knew Al Davis was a Southern Cal alum. I thought he was just an assistant coach there at one time. Nice research.

is it just me or is this Pola-lawsuit thing a big non-issue?

question #1 - who will the bruins next coach be?

question #2 - what are the chances barkley stays for his senior year?

Apparently there is no limit to how stupid kitty can be. It's not like the protocol for doing this wasn't established in the last century. It's not like kitty didn't have Fisher's home phone and his cell phone. It's not like his Dad didn't also. It's not like the Asst. AD hired last week, Jk McKay didn't know how to go about making contact with a person under contract with another entity. Captain C above has it right ... "the gift that keeps on givin and he's just getting started. Fire his a-- tomorrow and cut the losses that are yet to come.

This is awesome because it gives us a chance to see how Pat and JK handle it. No doubt better than the many ranting on this board. Barney brings up a good point, but fails to ask the question. What is the agenda?

Monte has been a high-level NFL assistant for many years, and he must have known Lane's intent and probably offered advice. So why the big stink from Fisher and the bumbling Titans? Instead of just flailing the hooked fish that you are, ask the question Wolf!

I often read comments by trojan on these blogs wondering why UCLA and other schools' fans don't leave these blogs and post on their own, and someone (I forgot who) said "the reason we post here is because USC keeps doing something stupid every day, and they gives so much to laugh about" well, I couldn't agree more, USC is in fact the laugh factory of college football.

Has anyone done more to destroy his name in the past 24 months than Lane Kiffin? first he refused to leave Oakland when the owner clearly told him to leave, which reminded me of a stupid cat that once you feed him you own him.

Then he goes to Tennessee and starts causing trouble by accusing other schools of violating NCAA rules.

Then he said he would beat Florida, then bolts after one year to USC.

Then the minute the gets to USC he starts contacting players/recruits from Tennessee, while USC is being investigated!

This guy's a train wreck, I have a feeling my boy Haden will spend the next few years baby-sitting this arrogant little scumbag.

Shakespeare was right.

ND - If SC is a laugh factory, what would you call Neutered Dame football? The tragic circus?

Kiffin is an absolute idiot for not following protocol! I wonder where is Haden?, where is Monte? to hold the kids hand because clearly he is too young to know or understand how the game is played. Now with that said the biggest idiots in all of this is Jeff Fisher and the Titans....seriously a... L-A-W-S-U-I-T ???? When I first heard this today (second hand) I thought it was a joke, how completely sad and desperate to actually follow through with a lawsuit. Show some F'n pride Tennessee, this is kind of like suing an ex-girlfriend for dumping you for a a new dude, a dude who is a starter on JV! Seriously, it is pathetic, he is a running back coach, who is going to a college program for a better title and TN is blowing its load and lawyering up. Jeff Fisher - I used to think you were the man, and honestly bud, no matter how big a douche Kiffin may or may not be, you need to disassociate yourself with this big time and lay this 100% on the inbred TN ownership cause seriously bud this reeks of you jumping the shark, don't do it man, your legacy is better than that! Or at least should be!

Jethro Bodine: oh no you din't just pull a Free-thinker and try to correct me with wrong info!!!

yes Al Davis was a Southern Cal coach. does that not make him a trojan? as you know, the term alum is used loosely in athletic circles to refer to a former member of the team. e.g., we all know John Mckay was not an alum. but i'm sure you all consider John McKay a trOJie. and we know a trOJie is a trOJie for life, ergo, Al "Hall of Famer" Davis is a Trojie for life. ah i haven't had to employ my Platonian dialectic in some time.

but oh man, you din't go totally Free-Thinker on me! he tried to correct me on an old political quote and got owned!! he was completely wrong!! how embarrassing!!!

Hey Slow-Thinker, no new history lessons today? how about a recap of how "Spirio Agnew" was the 40th President?? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!

AUUUUUU-WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

Charlie,

You screwed up and you know it. Grab a bucket and keep bailing!

Your alter ego Captain C. said it was "Spirio". Not sure where you got that Agnew was 40th president since he was veep under 37th.

I doubt anyone will disagree that there is some odd linkage between you and Wolf.

It is hard to comprehend why any intelligent or reasonable person would you go to such great lengths to ardently adulate and vocally defend an individual in whom they have no vested interest. (This brings into question your smarts and sensibility.)

Besides, its not like you've latched on to Kate Winslet or Angelina Jolie here Bucket buddy, you've got a love-fest going with a balding, fact-challenged, puerile blogger.

Isn't that queer?

ah Professor SLow-Thinker, back so early from your history classes? so much conjecture....it's all there in front of you, yet you can't see it. HAHA, this brings into question your smarts and sensibility!

Kate Winslet, is that the chubby girl from Titanic? i much prefer her English accented associate Kate Blanchett!!

although none of the ladies you mention has ever provided me any sweeeeeeeet scooops about Southern Cal like wolf, so thanks for your comments but i will just stick with wolfman as my hero for now!

AUUUUUUUUU-WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

Previous regime put Kiff in bad position not letting McNair go till first of July. Big hole to fill. We bringing the championship family back baby. It's a family reunion. No love lost in competition. Pac 10 crown here we come!

who will ucla's next coach be. the current clown isn't getting it done.

notre dame has been a laugh factory for something like 15 years. but don't worry, we've been there. we understand. maybe kelly can turn it around. at least usc may have an additional top five or ten opponent next year to bolster our ap title bid.

seriously, who will the bruins' next coach be? it must be sad to be a bruin these days. no wonder they populate this wonderful website.

I've always heard the problem with usc getting a softball team is lack of land. i saw some softball on tv last night and i thought of the gutty little bruins. why doesn't usc knock down that parking garage on fig near jefferson, build undeground parking with a softball field at ground level? i've seen something similar at cal tech in pasadena.

Charlie Bucket, I do need to correct you on one point. The owner of the Raiders is named Jim Davis, not Al Davis.

Al Davis was a famous jazz musician. I beleive he played the trumpet.

"The lawsuit, filed in Davidson County Chancery Court, said Pola's contract required him to get written permission to discuss jobs with other teams." The requirement is on Pola, not Kiffin or USC. They may have a legit suit against Pola, but at no point was USC purvey or informed in any way about Pola's contract details, nor can they be held responsible. Pola had the obligation, not Kiffin or USC. What is so difficult to understand here?

Further, this is the second time Kiffin approached Pola to offer him this job. The first time Lane did contact Jeff out of courtesy. Pola turned the offer down and later just before making the offer to another Lane decided to call him one last time. That is the call in question. It is not the first contact. The case is VERY weak to say the VERY least!

Sy, the Titans do not need to prove that USC/Kiffin knew the details of Pola's contract with the Titans, or that USC/Kiffin had ever even seen the contract. It is sufficient if the Titans can show that USC/Kiffin knew that Pola had a contract with the Titans (presumably, USC/Kiffin did know).

Now, your second point may have some merit. IF it's true that (a) Kiffin and/or USC had previously approached the Titans before a previous offer to Pola, and (b) had previously obtained some sort of blessing from the Titans to make an offer or offers to Pola, then the question would be: what exactly did the Titans give Kiffen/USC permission to do? A single offer only? Could that permission cover future offers, if Pola turned down the initial offer? How far into the future? As more details come out, the merits, if any, of the case will become known, but for now it is too early for us to know.

Hi Cafe 84 Pizza,

I like your logic. One thought would be that if there was a second contact after a blessing and all verbal, I cannot see a case here (as long as it is not heard in Tennessee!). If there were no previous contacts until Friday it would seem unreasonable for USC or Kiffin to know the terms of Pola's contract, which are not standard. In such a case Pola made the agreement and would naturally have full responsibility. As USC made contact Friday night and the offer was accepted Saturday morning it would be unreasonable for Kiffin or USC to have considered Pola's contract. Also, his contract does not hold responsible anyone but him for any and all breaches. I think this is a real shot in the dark for the Titans who are looking for a deep pocket.

Sy, you need to drop the idea that the terms of Pola's contract could absolve USC/Kiffin of responsibility for inducing Pola to breach that contract (if he did breach it). If USC/Kiffin induced Pola to breach his contract, and if they knew about the existence of the contract, then they could be found liable, even if they didn't know what exactly the terms were. Knowledge of the contract terms is not a required element for a contractual interference cause of action -- at least in California. I don't know how contractual interference law works in Tenn., but I suspect it is fairly similar.

Even if the Titans sue Pola for breach of contract and win, that doesn't mean they can't also sue USC/Kiffin for inducing the breach.

In Anglo-American law (meaning our legal system which we inherited from England, not "law for white folks"), there is a conceptual distinction between a tort and a breach of contract. If Kiffin/USC induced Pola to breach his contract, Kiffin/USC have committed a tort. Pola, meanwhile, may have breached his contract, but the terms of the contract do not make Pola responsible for Kiffin/USC's tortious conduct.

Westwood Bob: thanks for the heads up. always someone to keep me honest around here!

Bucket-of-Sh** & WestWoodSlob: a perfect match.

Hi Cafe 84 Pizza,

I do appreciate the intellectual discourse regarding the legal details of this matter. There are a few suppositions that you have asserted with apparent assumption – feel free to correct me:

1) That Lane and/or USC were aware of the unusual nature of his contract. Remember, the Titans claim revolves around Pola's specific clause regarding contact with another potential employer. As I understand it, this clause is not common.

2) That no permission had been given prior. As I understand the events, Kiffin went through Fisher to make an offer, which was rejected by Pola. If this is the case then it is reasonable to assume that Kiffin knew Pola's contract. It is also very difficult for the Titans to claim that Kiffin violated by a second contact as that is not clear as of yet to be a violation of his contract. I doubt a judge would hold that to be the case unless very specifically noted in his contract.

3) If this was the first contact (not my understanding) than it would be hard to prove that Pola indicated to Kiffin his contractual details over a call on a Friday night. Without that knowledge proving that Lane willfully interfered with malicious intent will be next to extremely difficult. Even if he did know the case is specifically about malicious intent with the desire to harm the Titans. Clearly Lane wanted Pola because he worked with him and felt he was the best man for the job, not to hurt the Titans.

I cannot see how the Titans can overcome these huge hurdles. There are many and each is fraught with issues to prove. If this all happened in a few hours via verbal conversations only (as I understand the events since Friday) there seems little chance for a case. Further, if Lane did what Jeff has done in the past or the Titans there case becomes more problematic. I'm fairly sure they have done so in approaching coaches who are employed as it is a common practice.

It was interesting that they want a jury trial. The court of public appeal will be easier than fighting the case on legal merit. If the case is decided by a jury in Tennessee it will not matter much what the law is or even the facts are and I think the Titans are hoping for this to be the case. USC should immediately move for a change of venue to a neutral state. It would be hard to argue that a fair jury can be found in Tennessee. They should also move for a summary judgment to dismiss the case and see if they get lucky. It will be an opportunity to evade a jury should the judge deem the case baseless enough to dismiss it outright. Once it gets to a jury it will be a crap shoot as SC and Kiffin are not well thought of or liked in most of the country at the moment.

Look forward to your thoughts...