By: Rob Harris
Last May, when Vijay Singh filed his complaint against the PGA Tour, many people–and I am one of them–thought he was embarking upon a fool’s errand. The essence of his claim, as you may recall, was that the Tour acted unlawfully by suspending him based on his use of deer antler spray–even though (a) the leading testing laboratory determined that the spray contained a banned substance, and (b) the Tour withdrew the suspension before it went into effect when Vijay presented supplemental evidence suggesting the spray did not contain an impermissible ingredient.
Not only did the legal claims appear weak, but there were serious questions about how this seemingly quixotic crusade could be in Vijay’s interest.
This second issue remains in play, but, as to the legal claims, it appears as though Vijay is set to win round one.
After Vijay filed the suit, the Tour submitted to the court a motion to dismiss, arguing that Vijay failed to assert a viable claim for judicial determination.
In arguments before the court last week, Judge Eileen Bransten stated that she wanted the issue of court directed exchange of information “to be tailored to the remaining causes of action that I’m not dismissing. So now you know. You know the answer.”
Thus, while the court’s formal decision has not issued, it is apparent that at least some of Vijay’s claims will survive the Tour’s motion to dismiss.
What makes this more interesting is that the information Vijay seeks–and which the Tour claims is confidential–apparently concerns other players who Vijay claims received different treatment from the Tour than he did. As his attorney stated in court proceedings last week, “I can stand here in court today and provide the Court with four or five or six or seven other names of similarly situated golfers who the PGA treated differently. I don’t think the PGA wants that and we don’t want to do it.”
In the world of litigation bargaining chips, Vijay has launched a big one. The fact that the case has survived a motion to dismiss, opening the specter of courtroom conversation about the Tour’s inner relationships with its players, increases the likelihood of a settlement. Of course, what it is that Vijay seeks–perhaps an apology and commensurate $$$–remains a question.