NFL Opens Its Defense in Raider Lawsuit

Amid indications that the presentation of evidence in the Oakland Raiders’ lawsuit against the NFL is drawing to a close, the NFL kicked off its defense in the case with an economist who sought to rebut the team’s claim it is owed more than $1 billion in damages.

Richard J. Gilbert, an economist at UC Berkeley, testified that he believes the deal the Raiders took to return to Oakland in 1995 was worth more than the deal the team has said it was trying to put together to build a new stadium at Hollywood Park.

Under cross-examination for most of the day by Raider attorney Joseph M. Alioto, Gilbert also testified that the value of the L.A. market to the NFL is zero. Two years ago, Houston was awarded the NFL’s 32nd team; owner Bob McNair put up a $700-million expansion fee.

But Gilbert maintained that Los Angeles, the nation’s No. 2 TV market, is worth nothing to the NFL until the league expands here.

With several jurors and others in the courtroom rolling their eyes or laughing, an incredulous Alioto asked whether a person’s house is worth nothing until he sells it. No, the economist said, because that’s a “tangible opportunity,” one that “actually exists.”

Gilbert is one of perhaps only a handful of NFL witnesses expected to be called in the wake of six weeks of testimony put on by the Raiders. NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue, the first witness in the case--called by the Raiders-- may take the stand again, this time called by the league. Testimony could end by the middle of next week, lawyers said.

The trial centers on the team’s claim that the league interfered with the Hollywood Park proposal and forced the Raiders back to Oakland. The Raiders, who played in L.A. from 1982 to 1994, also claim they still own the Los Angeles market for NFL football.