Raiders Lose Bid on Lawsuit

A state appeals court ruled in favor of the NFL on Wednesday, throwing out an earlier ruling that had granted the Oakland Raiders a new trial in their $1.2-billion lawsuit against the league over the rights to the Los Angeles market.

The 2nd District Court of Appeal overturned a new-trial order issued in September 2002 by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge, who had found juror misconduct.

One juror, according to documents filed in the case, repeatedly told the others that he hated the Raiders and owner Al Davis and would “never find for the Raiders.” Another wrote on butcher paper “statements of law for the jury to refer to and use,” and taped them to the wall. That violated the rule that jurors get the law in a case only from the judge.

The appeals court, in a unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel, said there had been no misconduct serious enough to warrant a new trial. “We reverse the order granting a new trial and affirm the judgment in all other respects,” the judges said.

The court also rejected the Raiders’ appeal of the trial court’s ruling in the league’s favor on revenue sharing. On that issue, the appeals court ruled that the Raiders were obligated under NFL bylaws to share revenue derived from their lease in Oakland.

The Raiders had argued that the money generated by the sale of personal-seat licenses was part of their deal to move back to Oakland from L.A. in 1995 and they were not obligated to share that with the rest of the league.

“We’re pleased by today’s unanimous decision, and we hope now that this long-running Raiders’ litigation can come to an end,” said Joe Browne, an NFL executive vice president.

The Raiders plan to appeal Wednesday’s decision to the California Supreme Court, team attorney Larry Feldman said.

“Obviously, we are very disappointed,” Feldman said. “We believe that the trial court was correct when it determined the Raiders did not get a fair trial.”

The Raiders and the NFL have battled in courtrooms for more than two decades. In 1982, the team beat the league in an antitrust case, clearing the way for a move to Los Angeles.

The 2002 order had raised questions about an NFL move back to L.A.

The area has been without a team since after the 1994 season, when the Rams left Anaheim for St. Louis and the Raiders went to Oakland, the team’s original home.

Asked whether the ruling removed a potential hurdle for the league in bringing a team back to the L.A. area, Browne said, “No one ever believed that was the case, only certain parties in Northern California.”

In May, the league might receive presentations of potential stadium deals in and around the Los Angeles area. Four sites are under consideration: the Coliseum, the Rose Bowl, Anaheim and Carson.

After returning to Oakland, the Raiders said they still “owned” the Los Angeles market for NFL football. The league said that it, not the Raiders, owned the market.

The case revolved around the Raiders’ claim that the league interfered with a 1995 deal to build a stadium at Hollywood Park; the Raiders said that forced the team back to Oakland. The league denied any wrongdoing.

The case appeared to have ended in May 2001, with a 9-3 jury verdict in the league’s favor. But the Raiders produced signed affidavits alleging juror misconduct.

In September 2002, Superior Court Judge Richard C. Hubbell issued a brief order calling for a new trial.

In its ruling, the 2nd District court said the allegations of jury misconduct simply weren’t enough to justify a new trial. It said the allegations were just that -- allegations only, not conclusive proof. For instance, there were conflicting stories about whether one juror’s comments during deliberations that he “hated the Raiders” showed bias or were, as the juror claimed, just a joke.

Judge Kathryn Doi Todd wrote the opinion. Judges Roger Boren and Michael Nott concurred.