My prediction, as I said earlier when I disagreed with you, is that this lawsuit will go nowhere and the plaintiffs will end up squandering money on legal bills that they could put to better use.
You may very well be right about it going nowhere.
However, since it is an association that is bringing the lawsuit (the story was not really clear who was in the association) the cost is spread out, and no taxpayer money is going to it.
Once again, the story is not clear.
However, there is mention in the story of over 8000 hotel rooms being cancelled.
An argument could be made regarding verbal contracts.
So, parties A and B have a contract, from which party C will also benefit. Party A backs out of contract and party C loses their benefit. Under what law can party C sue?
It’s not a law, it’s a tort. It’s sometimes called being a third party beneficiary, meaning that a person not a party to a contract would have benefited by the contract between two other parties. To determine if that tort would apply here, one would need know know what any actual contracts stated, how much the organization’s members relied at those contracts, conditions under which one of the parties could cancel the contract, how Georgia courts have ruled on third party beneficiary breaches, and probably a couple of other things.
I agree that they should have standing. That says I won’t be surprised if MLB tries to have this dismissed in summary judgment in order to slow down this lawsuit and force it to go thru the appeals process before the case can even be considered
But, if the action arose due to events in Georgia (assuming any contracts were subject to GA rules and law), the federal court will have to apply GA rules and laws.
Ortiz also said in the statement, “Small businesses in this community had valid contracts relating to the All-Star Game and other events, the result of two years of planning and all that was ripped away by fear and misinformation spewed by political activists.”