Agent’s Action May Have Hurt Carrier’s Status : Jurisprudence: Armato helped former USC player obtain loan without his knowledge.

A prominent Los Angeles sports agent may have violated NCAA rules and jeopardized the eligibility of former USC football star Mark Carrier without Carrier’s knowledge, according to interviews and documents obtained by The Times.

Leonard Armato, an attorney and president of Management Plus Enterprises Inc., of Century City, introduced Carrier to a bank he does business with to help Carrier obtain a disability insurance policy before the safety’s junior season at USC in 1989. Carrier said the bank, First Los Angeles Bank in Beverly Hills, loaned him about $6,000 to buy the policy based on his potential in the NFL.

But a month after the loan was obtained, Armato wrote a letter to the bank holding it harmless should litigation arise out of the loan made to Carrier. Carrier’s payment notices were sent in care of Armato’s law firm in Century City.

Also, allegations involving other services allegedly provided to Carrier by Armato’s company surfaced in documents connected to a lawsuit between Armato and a former employee, Jerome Stanley.

Both the introduction and letter to the bank by Armato could be considered a violation of NCAA rules because each constitutes a service to an amateur athlete. Under NCAA rules, agents are not allowed to provide any type of service or benefit to an amateur athlete without jeopardizing the athlete’s eligibility. Agents can talk to an athlete about their services, but that’s all.

Carrier and his mother, Marie, said that Armato wrote the letter and received the payment notices without their knowledge or authorization. Both said they did not know a letter was written or that payment coupons were sent to Armato’s address until contacted by The Times last week.

“I got that loan on my own,” Carrier said. “Why would the bank need a letter?”

Marie Carrier said she made the payments on the loan.

Carrier turned professional after USC’s Rose Bowl victory against Michigan in 1990 and was the Chicago Bears’ first-round pick in the 1990 NFL draft. He did not choose Armato to be his agent, instead signing with agent Jeff Irwin of Scottsdale, Ariz.

Armato says he provided an introduction of Carrier to his bank and wrote a letter on his behalf, but contends he did not violate NCAA rules.

“In my experience this was not a violation,” Armato said. “ . . . I wanted to try to help a kid within the rules. It is not my practice to pay a player. I have never done it. I have never violated NCAA rules, and this is a great concern to me.”

Armato, who says he has been an agent for 10 years, has a clientele that includes former USC football players Ronnie Lott and Rodney Peete and former Loyola Marymount basketball player Bo Kimble.

Rich Hilliard, a Director of Enforcement for the NCAA, said he could only speculate on the consequences for Carrier had the situation been known at the time. But Hilliard said that “potentially, yes, the student’s amateur status could have been jeopardized, and that would have affected his eligibility.”

The NCAA allows an amateur athlete to purchase a disability policy, provided the loan is obtained without an outside third party involved. A copy of the policy and loan documents, if any, must be filed with the athlete’s school. Last year, the NCAA implemented a program to help athletes obtain policies.

USC Athletic Director Mike McGee said USC did not receive a copy of Carrier’s insurance or loan documents and did not have knowledge of the loan. Carrier said he thought he filed copies of the documents with the school, but wasn’t sure. Additional searches by USC this week could find no such documents, according to USC officials.

Despite the potential violations, it is unlikely that USC would have suffered NCAA penalties because school officials had no knowledge of the action. The NCAA deals differently with agent violations than those of boosters. Schools are held accountable for the actions of boosters, but usually not the actions of agents. However, according to NCAA officials, Carrier’s situation probably would have initiated an inquiry.

McGee, when notified last week of the allegations, called a meeting with football Coach Larry Smith and Carrier on campus.

“We--Larry (Smith) nor I--had no knowledge of it; furthermore, we do everything we can to keep agents at bay, and Leonard Armato is just another one of those agents,” McGee said.

The Carriers refused to produce a copy of the loan documents. “Mark doesn’t have to prove anything to anybody. I didn’t know about a letter. I never received anything from them and Mark didn’t either,” Marie Carrier said.

Carrier won the Jim Thorpe Award, given to the best defensive college player in the country, his junior season at USC. Last season with the Bears, he was voted the NFL’s defensive rookie of the year award and named to the Pro Bowl. This semester, Carrier is completing his degree in communications at USC.

This situation comes to light in the wake of legislation introduced in California that would amend the state’s Athlete Agents Registration Act. In that legislation, an agent or attorney/agent interfering with a student athlete’s eligibility would face discipline and heavy fines from the Labor Commission and, depending on the section of the labor code violated, could be charged with a misdemeanor. Currently, the act deals more with agents in regards to contract regulations. Violators also face a criminal offense and stiff monetary penalties.

Armato said that he never approached Carrier while Carrier was still playing for USC, but that instead Carrier approached him for advice on how he could obtain a disability insurance policy prior to Carrier’s junior season. Armato said he provided an introduction of Carrier to the bank he does business with at First Los Angeles Bank. He said he told them Carrier would be a high draft pick and a person that “will go far.”

“They said, ‘Will we get in trouble for this?’ . . . I said ‘As long as I’m not involved you won’t. Take care of him. . . .’ They said, ‘Will you send a letter?’ I said ‘Yes.’ ”

Armato said he cannot explain why Carrier’s bills were sent in care of his law firm business address.

MORE ACCUSATIONS

Carrier’s name surfaced in a deposition stemming from a law suit between Armato and Jerome Stanley, an agent who worked for Armato as a Client Development Coordinator at Management Plus Enterprises in 1989.

Armato fired Stanley in January 1990 and filed a defamation of character suit in Los Angeles County Superior Court against him. Stanley countersued and the matter settled in April 1990, with Stanley releasing Management Plus and Armato from any claims and agreeing to pay them a certain sum of money. Stanley also wrote a letter, dated April 30, 1990, disavowing any statements he made previously.

However, Armato filed another suit against Stanley in February for breach of contract.

Wednesday, Stanley called The Times and said he stood by his deposition.

On Thursday, a letter dated April 18, 1991, was faxed to The Times from Armato’s office signed by Stanley that said in part: “In reference to Leonard Armato’s being accused of NCAA violations for his actions involving Marc (sic) Carrier, I presently have no recollection of any violations occuring. . . . To date, he has never been found to have committed any crimes or actions violative of any NCAA regulation. . . .”

Stanley is an attorney/agent based in Westwood. His clients include Brian Shaw and Reggie Lewis of the Boston Celtics.

In Stanley’s deposition, taken under oath on April 2, 1990, he says that while Carrier was still playing for the Trojans, he rented Carrier a car, was involved in obtaining a loan for Carrier’s mother and purchased airline tickets for Carrier’s family to travel to a USC football game in Arizona. Stanley says that Armato had prior knowledge and authorized all services that he provided to Carrier.

Armato says that he never authorized Stanley to do any of these things. He said he was uncomfortable in general with Stanley trying to “push the line,” and that is one of the reasons he was fired.

“Maybe he fudged, but I’m not aware if he did or what he did,” Armato said.

Carrier denies receiving anything from Armato or Stanley, and said that Stanley is trying to do a “hatchet job” on him. Carrier said the matter is between Armato and Stanley, and he (Carrier) is being used as a “scapegoat.”

Stanley testified that Armato authorized him to rent a car for Carrier in December of 1989 after USC’s regular season but prior to Carrier playing in the Rose Bowl. A $500 charge from Dollar Rent-a-Car of Los Angeles is listed on Stanley’s corporate American Express card billing, an exhibit included in Stanley’s deposition.

In his deposition, Stanley testifies that when he rented the car for Carrier he knew it was in violation of NCAA regulations, but explained that he “had to” do it.

“That that was part of my job. That was my job. That was my assignment at the time,” Stanley said.

Armato’s attorney, Alan J. Weil, later asked Stanley: “Your assignment was to violate the NCAA rules?”

Stanley: “Yes. At that time.”

In a previous passage in the deposition, Weil asked Stanley:

Question: “Are you saying that Mr. Armato forced you to rent a car for Mr. Carrier?”

Answer: “No, I did not say Mr. Armato forced me. Mr. Armato authorized me to rent a car. We discussed a loan to buy a car used. He authorized $3,000. I went back and talked to Mark and said, ‘Can you do it for $3,000?’

“He (Carrier) said, ‘It’s going to be a hassle.’ I told him to look in ‘The Recycler.’ He (Carrier) said, ‘Well, never mind, you know. I will just go to somebody else.’

“I came back and told Leonard, you know. It’s not liking (sic) (to) go ahead.”

Carrier denies this, saying he was never offered anything by Stanley or Armato.

Armato denies authorization or knowledge of Stanley’s alleged activities involving a car for Carrier, but said: “I would say (to Stanley) ‘Look, we have to play by the rules.’ There are car dealers who will furnish a car to an athlete based on his being a high draft pick. I told Jerome to find a car dealer who can do that.”

Carrier is the only athlete named in Stanley’s deposition.

As a condition of the settlement of the original suit, Stanley’s letter of apology to Armato dated April 30, 1990, said in part: “. . . I know you are a person of integrity who has consistently done an excellent job for your clients. I completely disavow any statements attributed to me to the contrary.”

Stanley said last week that the letter did not constitute a recanting of his deposition testimony, which he stands by.

“I did not do anything at Management Plus that was not understood by Leonard,” Stanley said. “I was uncomfortable with a lot of things at Management Plus, and it got to the point where I didn’t want to play along any more.”

Armato contends, however, that Stanley’s letter does recant his deposition testimony.