Section 5 Grievance
Dispute Between Contract Advisor and Contract AdvisorJohn W. Rickert Grievant16 Brendan LaneNiskayuna, New York 12309AndAudie A. AttarRespondent2203 Watermark PlaceIrvine, California 92612Matters Concerning:Tortious InterferenceViolation of Restrictive Covenant and Non-compete AgreementFailure to Comply with NFLPA RegulationsFailure to Recognize the Jurisdiction and Authority of the NFLPAServed:Via Facsimile and Certified MailAction Required:Please serve a response upon me within 20 days of receipt with a copy to the NFLPAlegal department.
BEFORE ARBITRATOR ROGER KAPLAN
In the Matter of Arbitration Between: ))
Motion for Arbitration Order and
)
Request for Relief
)
John W. Rickert
)Grievant;))and))
Audie A. Attar
Respondent))
John W. Rickert,
(“Rickert”), a registered and Certified Contract Advisor since2003, hereby filed a Complaint and Demand for Relief from Respondent,
Audie A. Attar
,(“Attar”), also a Certified Contract Advisor. The Grievance was received by Attar and the NFLPA, on or about October 3, 2011.The Grievance was based upon the following facts:1. On or about the months of February, March, and April of 2011, Attar interferedwith the contractual relationship with Rickert and players: Matt Ware of theArizona Cardinals, Aaron Berry of the Detroit Lions, and Roberto Wallace of theMiami Dolphins. As a result the 3 above mentioned players were provided anemail address by Attar and enticed to terminate their Standard RepresentationAgreements with Rickert.2.On or about the months of February 2011 to the present, Attar has attempted toencourage Chris Ogbannaya of the Cleveland Browns and Cam Morrah of theSeattle Seahawks to terminate their respective Standard Representation Agreementswith Rickert as well.3.At some point in the year 2011, Audie Attar signed Pierre Allen to a StandardRepresentation Agreement and went on to execute a contract on Allen’s behalf withthe Seattle Seahawks. This is a clear violation of the restrictive covenant andagreement not to compete pursuant to the agreement executed with Rickert.4.On or about September 30, 2011, Attar served Rickert with a notice of claim inUnited States District Court for a breach of contract between 2 certified contractadvisors. The agreement clearly states that the NFLPA shall have original jurisdiction over any and all disputes regarding said agreement. Therefore, Attar has failed to recognize the jurisdiction and authority of the NFLPA, which is blatantviolation for any certified contract advisor.
Section 5 GrievanceRickert vs. AttarMay 16, 2012Page 3
5.Attar received commissions from clients in 2009 and 2010 who he did not have aStandard Representation Agreement with, and he failed to report these commissionsto Rickert.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Grievant petitions and applies to the Arbitrator for:1. Order which requires payment from Attar to Rickert for one-half of thecommissions received for the duration of the careers of the 3 players that Attar improperly induced to terminate Rickert.2.Order which requires payment from Attar to Rickert for one-half of any and allrevenues earned by Pierre Allen.3.A directive from the NFLPA to cease attempts at tortious interference with any andall clients of other contract advisors.4.Compensatory Damages as seen as appropriate by this tribunal Attar’s damaging of Rickert’s professional reputation by inducing the said terminations and attempting 2additional terminations.5.Discipline and/or referral of Attar to CARD for significant violations of regulationsthat govern certified contract advisors.6.Suspension and/or monetary fines for Attar’s willful and blatant disregard for thelegitimate authority and jurisdiction of the NFLPA.7.Any other damages this tribunal deems necessary and appropriate, including, butnot limited to costs and attorney’s fees for pursuing this claim.
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Section 5 Grievance Filed by JR Rickert v. Audie Attar
551
Reads
1
Readcasts
0
Embed Views
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
