Lance sued by Justice Department!

Lance's best defense would be that the USPS knew full well he and the whole team were doping the whole time, and sponsored them anyway.

What if the NOP were busted and Nike sued them, would anybody believe Nike didn't know all along?

Pretty much any corporation who sponsors a cycling team is gonna have advisors and consultants telling them that either the team will have dopers, or it will come in last. I'm pretty sure USPS wanted to sponsor the winning team. No way did nobody tell them how their team was winning. No f'in way. Ridiculous.

luv2run wrote:

quick draw wrote:

do you really believe that the USPS "made" money here? this is the same organization that spends money like it is monopoly money. moreover, just because the USPS logo got splashed across television and magazine covers doesn't mean that the USPS made money. do you really think that people wound up mailing more letters because they watched LA win the TdF and he had a USPS logo on? good luck with that.

The goal was to get into the European market not the domestic market. Overnight deliveries is where USPS makes its revenue.

that couldn't be more categorically false, but thank you for trying to play the game of sounding like you know what you are talking about. the international component of its revenue is microscopic:

Distinction without a difference. Even in a contract suit, if you're not damaged, you can't recover.

Must prove loss wrote:

A simple fact: One-half of trial attorneys will lose a case.

False. The vast majority of cases settle.

1. Punitive damages.

2. Makes the public statement the usps was not colluding in the act of doping.

It would be really funny if it turned out that members of USPS actively procured/knew of Armstrong's doping. This has the potential to blow up in their face. ;)

This isn't a simple contract dispute, between two parties: Lance and the US Government. It's a claim of a violation of the "False Claims Act", that Landis filed against Armstrong and others, that they defrauded the US government.The Justice Department is not suing Lance, per se, but joining Landis' whistleblower lawsuit against Lance and others.Named defendents: Armstrong, Bruyneel, Thomas Weisel, Armstrong’s agent Bill Stapleton and Barton Knaggs (Jim Ochowicz?)Named organizations: Tailwind Sports, Montgomery Sports and Capital Sports and Entertainment. Role of USA Cycling also questioned.The complaint is that: "the defendants submitted or caused to be submitted claims for payment to the USPS with knowledge that the USPS Team was engaged in doping and other wrongful conduct in violation of the terms of the sponsorship contracts."Other riders were not sued by Landis, because, although they also doped, and likely violated their contracts, they did not "submit, or cause to be submitted" false claims for money to the US Government.While the question of damages is important, it is not the only one. The Justice Department is seeking "triple damages", but even if no damage is proven, there is also the question of "unjust enrichment". The remedy for "unjust enrichment" is to make restitution. They may have to pay all of the money back, regardless of liability of wrong-doing. Damages are a legal remedy, to compensate for loss, while restitution is an equitable remedy, to compensate for unjust gains.IANAL.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

It's not really my claim. It is the claim the Justice Department made in their filing. I have not examined either the filing itself or the underlying contracts, although I am sure they will be admitted into evidence eventually.

I have no idea why they did not sue all the riders, as I imagine you are right that they all signed very similar contracts.

They did sue Bruyneel and Tailwind Sports.

I don't have much experience with the FCA, but at least under common law principles, unjust enrichment seems like a stretch.

Thanks for all the additional info. I have not had any time to read up on it yet.

If Lance had to do it all over again do you think he would? Probably yes but a bit differently perhaps. A lesson should be learned here for all. After it's all said and done Lance will have lost all championships, all his respect, most of his money and possibly jail time. Yikes! All to feed his never ending ego.

Maybe it's a stretch (not for me to decide), but it seems to be in the complaint:

"Defendants were unjustly enriched to the extent of the payments and other benefits they received from the USPS, either directly or indirectly,"

And Lance's lawyers seem to think it's only about damages "The government must prove not only that the Postal Service was defrauded, but that it was damaged somehow."

I don't know which is a stretch, under which law, but it seems to me, that if Lance, and others, lied to get money from the government, they don't get to keep it, regardless of harm caused to the government (or not).

It seems like a good time for Lance to start spending his money on hookers and blow.

Now if the DOJ would grow a pair and put some Wall Street profiteers in with him, the world would be a more just place.

__________________________________________________________

DOJ prefers to take on individuals with limited means to hire heavyweight lawyers. DOJ knows Wall Street biggies can hire lawyers smarter than the second-third tier guys who work at DOJ.

The USPS is not an official part of the government.The USPS invested in a Tour de France team with the intent to make money off the investment. They did indeed make money on the investment. The investment is a tax deduction as a business cost. The money made is claim as business income.

rekrunner wrote:

Maybe it's a stretch (not for me to decide), but it seems to be in the complaint:

"Defendants were unjustly enriched to the extent of the payments and other benefits they received from the USPS, either directly or indirectly,"

And Lance's lawyers seem to think it's only about damages "The government must prove not only that the Postal Service was defrauded, but that it was damaged somehow."

I don't know which is a stretch, under which law, but it seems to me, that if Lance, and others, lied to get money from the government, they don't get to keep it, regardless of harm caused to the government (or not).

this is pure malarkey. the USPS is an independent agency of the US government and its formation is expressly provided for in the US Constitution. it therefore does NOT pay taxes. where do these idiots who post on here come from?

Suing for what???? wrote:

Not trolling here.

I seriously don't understand the rationale for this suit. Athletes are sponsored primarily for publicity. They can't seriously claim they didn't get the expected public exposure. They have actually gotten years of extra mentions and discussion after they stopped funding the team. Maybe Lance should sue them for all the years of unpaid advertising (OK, maybe that was a trollish comment.)

Does the post office really need publicity? I mean, who doesn't know about the post office? Shoot, I have this envelope that I want to send to someone in a different state. If only there was a way!

This is more than a breach of contract case. This is a civil False Claims Act case alleging Armstrong committed a violation of the FCA each time he sought or received payment from the USPS because he did so in knowing violation of his contract by taking and using illegal substances. I have seen FCA cases brought on far less.

The damages can be considerable in a FCA case, typically much more in terms of liability than with a mere breach of contract case. And the knowledge requirement under the civil FCA is less than with common law fraud, requiring only a negligent disregard as opposed to specific intent. Statutory amendments in 2009 have made it easier for qui tam plaintiffs and the Government to bring FCA actions.

The Government can seek and obtain treble damages in a FCA case.

This case arose as a FCA qui tam, or whistleblower case filed by Floyd Landis as a whistleblower. The DoJ filing deadline to "intervene" was set to expire, and the Government had to file before the 60 day intervention deadline passed.

Landis' share of recovery as a qui tam relator, if any, will be reduced by virtue of the fact the Government intervened in the case. This, however, is not bad news for Landis. With the Government involved, odds for recovery typically increase.

Armstrong really has to worry about his financial viability. The prospects of a judgment, the crushing burden of paying lawyers (these can be complex cases) are very significant. Perhaps this is the karma people desire for him.

Sorry for the legal summary - but too much information above was not really accurate.

"it is a simple breach of contract suit."

WRONG! It's a qui tam suit brought under the false claims act and would require the DOJ to prove that the government was defrauded out of money. That is going to be a difficult burden to prove because (as it has been pointed out) the government previously admitted it received the benefit of its bargain with Armstrong. This is a horrible waste of taxpayer money and resources.

Surely, somewhere in that act, there must be something about when the government is a knowing and willing party to its being "defrauded."

Does anyone seriously believe the USPS didn't know Lance was doping? He was hounded by rumors and accusations the whole time, and the USPS never heard of it? They had, at least, good reason to believe they were probably investing in a doper, yet whichever of them was in charge of that investment kept it going for years.

Someone at the USPS knew about the whole damn thing, and is going to be dragged into the spotlight to tell all and create a big scandal.

Everyone recall the great Lance running NYC Marathon and running 2:59 one year then 2:46 the next. Nike even had him paced by El G (because you know you need the very best to pace you if you are Lance!)

Well NYCRRC still has his phoney baloney results up on their site. Isn't it time they dq'd him like everyone else has?