Court Rules Team Failed to Justify Amount : Clippers Award From Arena Reduced

An appeal court Friday reversed the major portion of a 1984 San Diego Superior Court decision ordering the operator of the Sports Arena to pay the Clippers more than $500,000 in damages because the building was structurally unfit for professional basketball.

In a 22-page legal brief, the 4th District Court of Appeal ruled that the National Basketball Assn. team, which played at the arena for six years before moving to Los Angeles in 1984, should receive only about $35,000 of the original award.

The appellate court agreed that operators of the Sports Arena failed to keep the facility in adequate condition, as required by their contract with the Clippers. But the three-judge panel reversed the bulk of the original Superior Court decision, primarily because the team failed to adequately support its arguments on how large the award should be.

Arn Tellem, general counsel for the Clippers, refused to comment on the decision because he had not received a copy at his office in Los Angeles.

Peter Graham, the Canadian investor who operated the Sports Arena for 14 years before departing in 1985, could not be reached for comment. The current operator of the arena, El Cajon businessman Vince Ciruzzi, also could not be reached.

After the Clippers’ victory in Superior Court in June, 1984, team officials said they saw the win as vindication of their allegations that the Sports Arena’s management had done a poor job of operating the 13,000-seat facility. The team first filed suit in 1979.

The arena has been criticized for having a leaking roof and uncomfortable seats. In addition, many pieces of the wooden basketball floor did not fit together properly, leaving gaps.

Clippers officials argued in legal briefs that the arena “was among the NBA’s worst facilities” and that it was “considered a joke in the NBA.”

Appeal Court Judges P.J. Dremer, J. Staniforth and J. Butler agreed that the arena’s operators failed “to provide and maintain adequate specified facilities” as called for in a contract with the Clippers.

The appeal court said, however, that the Clippers provided insufficient evidence to support the award of damages “based upon the difference between the value of the premises promised and the value of those actually provided.” The Clippers did not present evidence “of lost actual or projected income” because of problems with the arena. Instead, the team relied on opinion provided by team officials.

With that in mind, the award of damages “based upon reduction in rent must be reversed as not supported by substantial evidence,” the court ruled.

After the Clippers left for Los Angeles, city officials in San Diego issued an ultimatum to Graham, ordering him to perform more than $1 million in repairs. Much of that work has been completed.